• 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!

Poll: Public losing trust in President Obama

Do you honestly believe that every family in American equally paid $9k per year or that every individual paid $2k?
On average, that's exactly that everyone paid.
 
Well the core of the problem is quite plain, the Housing Market... lets not forget Rom Emanual's " A Crises is a terrible thing to waste." and to me it's pretty clear the left caused the Housing Market burst by ignoring the numbers in both 1989 and 2003. It's worth noting that in 2004 Fannie had 84% of it's clients as sub-prime. Also in 98 the market stopped following the flow of pricing and started following the flow of interest.
 
The burden of proof here is on you, not me.
To show the necessary relationship required to support your position, YOU must show that it CANNOT be averted, that is MUST happen, and NOTHING ELSE will stop it.

You can put such a test to any government policy. There is no 100% certainty. Can you prove that the U.S. would have been in greater danger had we not invaded Iraq? No of course not. It is all probability.
 
I was quoting Damn Yankee. But let's discuss this. How has liberalism led us to the precipice?

Spending too much. Regulating too much. Basically, acting like state socialists.
 
You can put such a test to any government policy. There is no 100% certainty.
So, you admit there is no necessary relationship.
Thank you.

And thus, as you have not illustrated the required necessary relationship, you have thereby left unsupported your argument that 'wishing Obama fails = wishing bad times for America'.
 
Last edited:
And how have conservatives differed?

Well, the "conservatives" (Ron Paul, Jim Demint) were voting and speaking out against those policies.

The Republicans, on the other hand, chose the role of spineless enablers.
 
The question was:



I was merely answering the question by using the same terminology. But if it makes you feel better, be my guest and belittle my terminology. *shrugs shoulders*



[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSvHpvHFXU0"]YouTube - George Michael - Faith[/nomedia]
 
Well, the "conservatives" (Ron Paul, Jim Demint) were voting and speaking out against those policies.

The Republicans, on the other hand, chose the role of spineless enablers.

That I will agree with. I am a Ron Paul fan.;)
 
So, you admit there is no necessary relationship.
Thank you.

And thus, as you have not illustrated the required necessary relationship, you have thereby left unsupported your argument that 'wishing Obama fails = wishing bad times for America'.

Again, his job is not to make laws, but to execute the laws of the land. If he fails to do his job the country suffers. Just as if the CEO of Microsoft fails in his job the company loses profits.
 
The question was:



I was merely answering the question by using the same terminology. But if it makes you feel better, be my guest and belittle my terminology. *shrugs shoulders*

So, if the question had been:

"Have you lost your psychophantic love of Obama yet?"

You would have answered:

"I haven't lost my psychophantic love..."

:confused:

Makes perfect sense.
 
Again, his job is not to make laws, but to execute the laws of the land. If he fails to do his job the country suffers. Just as if the CEO of Microsoft fails in his job the company loses profits.
I'm sorry -- you freely admitted that you could not show that the 'failure' you claim would occour MUST occour, if The Obama's policies flaied.

Thus, your position that ''wishing Obama fails = wishing bad times for America' is unsupportable. No way around it.
 
I'm sorry -- you freely admitted that you could not show that the 'failure' you claim would occour MUST occour, if The Obama's policies flaied.

Thus, your position that ''wishing Obama fails = wishing bad times for America' is unsupportable. No way around it.

You win this time Riddler, but we will meet again!!!!:lol:
 
On average, that's exactly that everyone paid.
That doesn't mean the amount saved per individual is the average paid. Medicaid/Medicare is paid for by higher income individuals to provide health care to lower income individuals.

By paying it back you are putting money back in the pockets of high income individuals and simply taking health care away from the lower income individuals.
 
Last edited:
That doesn't mean the amount saved per individual is the average paid.
It means that, on average, everyone paid that much.
Total payments / total people = average paid per person.
Some paid more, some paid less. But the average is the average.

Now, if you want to do this:
Total payment / total people that paid = average per person that paid
This will get you a large number per individual, as there are fewer individuals whi paid those taxes.

However you want to do it is if OK by me.

BUT, since you really just want to redistribute wealth, how about this:

Rather than have the federal medicare/medicaide programs, take the total amount paid and give to each individual. This will give a family of 4 over $9000/year, and they can take care of their own health care.
 
It means that, on average, everyone paid that much.
Total payments / total people = average paid per person.
Some paid more, some paid less. But the average is the average.

Now, if you want to do this:
Total payment / total people that paid = average per person that paid
This will get you a large number per individual, as there are fewer individuals whi paid those taxes.

However you want to do it is if OK by me.

BUT, since you really just want to redistribute wealth, how about this:

Rather than have the federal medicare/medicaide programs, take the total amount paid and give to each individual. This will give a family of 4 over $9000/year, and they can take care of their own health care.

How many of those low income families of 4 that actually qualify for Medicare/Medicaid pay $9000 per year towards the system?

I never said I agree with the system. I am just pointing out that by allowing people to keep the money they would be contributing you are NOT helping those people that receive benefits from the program. You are actually removing their health care while giving them no options to re-obtain it.
 
Last edited:
How many of those low income families of 4 that actually qualify for Medicare/Medicaid pay $9000 per year towards the system?
Who cares? The more the merrier, right?
You're the one that's worried about wealth not being redistributed -- you'd think that giving them $9000 that they didn't pay into the system would be a GOOD thing.

You are actually removing their health care while giving them no options to re-obtain it
You're giving them $9000 -- so, no, you aren't.
 
Who cares? The more the merrier, right?
You should since your whole logic is based on the fact that allowing these people to keep their $9k a year would allow them to purchase the health care they are provided. Your logic is flawed if these people are not paying this amount into the system.

You're the one that's worried about wealth not being redistributed -- you'd think that giving them $9000 that they didn't pay into the system would be a GOOD thing.

I do? Please quote me where I have stated this or any support for the system. You can even search this topic. I am quite vocal on my disgust for medicare/medicaid and Social security. That however doesn't stop me from seeing the flaws in your reasoning.

You're giving them $9000 -- so, no, you aren't.

Maybe I misunderstood your proposition. Are you now proposing that we just send these low income families of 4 a check for $9k and allow them to purchase their own health care even though they didn't contribute this amount?
 
Last edited:
It's not the being against, but the hope that the President will fail. If he fails, then one is essentially hoping for bad times in America.

Not necessarily, just looking for more Dems voting the more moderate way. The failure of his health plan might lead to a better plan. Lots of his plans have never been and the country's still hanging in there, so all is not lost if he doesn't get everything he wants. He actually wants to spend too much and this would make the country fail.
 
You should since your whole logic is based on the fact that allowing these people to keep their $9k a year would allow them to purchase the health care they are provided. Your logic is flawed if these people are not paying this amount into the system.
You must have missed the part where I said:

BUT, since you really just want to redistribute wealth, how about this:

Rather than have the federal medicare/medicaide programs, take the total amount paid and give to each individual. This will give a family of 4 over $9000/year, and they can take care of their own health care.

I do? Please quote me where I have stated this or any support for the system.
Your complaints:

Medicaid/Medicare is paid for by higher income individuals to provide health care to lower income individuals

By paying it back you are putting money back in the pockets of high income individuals and simply taking health care away from the lower income individuals.

I am just pointing out that by allowing people to keep the money they would be contributing you are NOT helping those people that receive benefits from the program.

These objections all revolve around the idea that the system resitributes wealth, and that to change the system as I originally noted will no longer do that.

That however doesn't stop me from seeing the flaws in your reasoning.
There's no flaw in my reasoning.

Maybe I misunderstood your proposition. Are you now proposing that we just send these low income families of 4 a check for $9k and allow them to purchase their own health care even though they didn't contribute this amount?
Yep. Get rid of the federal programs completely and just give people the money. Of course, if they dont use if for its intended purpose, then they're screwed -- but that's their choice.
 
Last edited:
You must have missed the part where I said:

BUT, since you really just want to redistribute wealth, how about this:

Rather than have the federal medicare/medicaide programs, take the total amount paid and give to each individual. This will give a family of 4 over $9000/year, and they can take care of their own health care.

Your complaints:

These objections all revolve around the idea that the system resitributes wealth, and that to change the system as I originally noted will no longer do that.


There's no flaw in my reasoning.


Yep. Get rid of the federal programs completely and just give people the money. Of course, if they dont use if for its intended purpose, then they're screwed -- but that's their choice.

I didn't miss the part as I directly responded to it above. Also, those aren't complaints, they are statements about the system. A complaint is I shouldn't be paying towards a system that I will never utilize and the people that do are allowed to extort.

Answer my below question, which I have asked twice now.

How many of the low income families that qualify for Medicare/Medicaid pay anywhere near $9k a year towards the system? $9k being the average value you feel you are so generously giving back to those low-income participants.
 
I didn't miss the part as I directly responded to it above. Also, those aren't complaints, they are statements about the system. A complaint is I shouldn't be paying towards a system that I will never utilize and the people that do are allowed to extort.
Whatever. The system is here now, you pay now.
Why not get actually something out of it?

Answer my below question, which I have asked twice now.
How many of the low income families that qualify for Medicare/Medicaid pay anywhere near $9k a year towards the system? $9k being the average value you feel you are so generously giving back to those low-income participants.
I did. Who cares? However many it is, it doesnt matter.
 
*Note, mods if this is not *BN* worthy, I beg your pardon, please move if that is the case.






Well well well. It seems that the honeymoon is over, and as people realize the emporer indeed has no clothes that its time to hold this man to his promises and actions. I for one am glad to see this empty suit's return to earth. The mod love mentality for him mad this American cringe at some of his countrymen....


That said, any of you obama supporters losing faith?

It only took 6 months for the Liberals to activate their brain cells...I'm impressed.:)
 
Back
Top Bottom