• 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!

New health insurance requirement.....was a GOP idea

Conservative said:
Our founders never envisioned a 3.8 trillion dollar govt. and debt service that soon will exceed the entire defense budget of this country.
Click to expand...

Well, that's debatable. They did let the federal government assume the rather huge state debt from the Revolutionary War.
 
Catawba said:
Because I am a pragmatist, in that I understand they are not dishonest of ignorant. They were just too optimistic about the ability to make social progress in this country. With a conservative society as immature as that in the US, we are realistically only able to take baby steps towards social progress made in the rest of the developed world decades ago.
Click to expand...

Social progress? What exactly does that mean and what qualifies you or Obama to define it? When are liberals ever going to recognize that their social engineering is a total and complete failure in terms of positive results but it does create a lot of victims. The more liberals try to social engineer the more victims they create. Could that be their ultimate goal? Along the way they appeal to a lot of good people, brainwash them with the thought of utopia and then destroy them by making them dependent.
 
Conservative said:
Social progress? What exactly does that mean and what qualifies you or Obama to define it?
Click to expand...

Social progress is putting the well being of our fellow countrymen ahead of personal greed.

And the election empowered our representatives to carry out the directive from the Constitution to promote the general welfare of the people.
 
Catawba said:
Because I am a pragmatist, in that I understand they are not dishonest of ignorant. They were just too optimistic about the ability to make social progress in this country. With a conservative society as immature as that in the US, we are realistically only able to take baby steps towards social progress made in the rest of the developed world decades ago.
Click to expand...

Are you implying that you're immature?
You're a small c conservative. :lol:

Your partisanship has overridden the reasoning parts of your brain.
Oh well, I guess there may be others willing to think before they act.
Have a nice day. :2wave:
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Are you implying that you're immature?
You're a small c conservative. :lol:

Your partisanship has overridden the reasoning parts of your brain.
Oh well, I guess there may be others willing to think before they act.
Have a nice day. :2wave:
Click to expand...


Only insults? No debate? I understand your position. :2wave:
 
Catawba said:
Social progress is putting the well being of our fellow countrymen ahead of personal greed.

And the election empowered our representatives to carry out the directive from the Constitution to promote the general welfare of the people.
Click to expand...

You didn't answer the question, what gives you or anyone else the right to define the well being of someone else or to define greed?

You don't seem to get it, ones well being is a personal responsibility. That isn't the role of the govt. Liberal social engineering creates dependence and debt that everyone else has to pay thus spreads misery equally to everyone is. You call that social justice?
 
Conservative said:
You didn't answer the question, what gives you or anyone else the right to define the well being of someone else or to define greed?

You don't seem to get it, ones well being is a personal responsibility. That isn't the role of the govt. Liberal social engineering creates dependence and debt that everyone else has to pay thus spreads misery equally to everyone is. You call that social justice?
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting nothing can be defined? That's there is no objective means in which to define these things?
 
Boo Radley said:
Are you suggesting nothing can be defined? That's there is no objective means in which to define these things?
Click to expand...

Yep, when it comes to individual welfare politicians cannot define the well being of someone else. Explain to me how a politician in D.C. can define what is best for you in your home town? That is an individual responsibility best handled by the individual in conjunction of the local and state governments.
 
Conservative said:
Yep, when it comes to individual welfare politicians cannot define the well being of someone else. Explain to me how a politician in D.C. can define what is best for you in your home town? That is an individual responsibility best handled by the individual in conjunction of the local and state governments.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? We can't say that a person unable to get proper care and suffers because of it has less well being than someone who can? I would have to dispute that with you. And even if state governments decide this, it would still be government deciding, which makes your argument silly. You should instead stick with arguing that we can decide this, but that it is more the role of local government to do so.
 
Boo Radley said:
Are you sure? We can't say that a person unable to get proper care and suffers because of it has less well being than someone who can? I would have to dispute that with you. And even if state governments decide this, it would still be government deciding, which makes your argument silly. You should instead stick with arguing that we can decide this, but that it is more the role of local government to do so.
Click to expand...

That the best you can do? People today in this country can get proper care through the free clinics we have and through our current system. Providing healthcare for all doesn't assure quality care as evidenced by the doctor shortage we have. You want to continue to discount that.

As for the difference between local and federal govt. I know where my Representative lives and know how to contact them. Local and state governments were set up that way and are closer to the people. Thus my argument is the same one our founders made when they set up this govt. Were they wrong? Logic isn't a strong point of yours.
 
Conservative said:
That the best you can do? People today in this country can get proper care through the free clinics we have and through our current system. Providing healthcare for all doesn't assure quality care as evidenced by the doctor shortage we have. You want to continue to discount that.

As for the difference between local and federal govt. I know where my Representative lives and know how to contact them. Local and state governments were set up that way and are closer to the people. Thus my argument is the same one our founders made when they set up this govt. Were they wrong? Logic isn't a strong point of yours.
Click to expand...

We don't have near enough free clinics, and they are often over stressed and can't handle the flow. You need to learn more on this topic.

And again, the doctor shortage is NOT the problem you think it is. And even if it were, it is fixable and not something that would make this reform unattainable.
 
Boo Radley said:
We don't have near enough free clinics, and they are often over stressed and can't handle the flow. You need to learn more on this topic.

And again, the doctor shortage is NOT the problem you think it is. And even if it were, it is fixable and not something that would make this reform unattainable.
Click to expand...

You need to learn more about individual responsibility and stop with your attempts at social engineering. It actually is you that doesn't understand human behavior nor do you understand that this POS legislation does nothing to address the infrastructure thus quality and quantity of care.

The doctor problem is a serious problem that you want to sweep under the rug. You ignore how incentive affects supply and how many doctors will leave the profession because of this legislation when fully implemented. On paper liberal legislation sounds good to a select group of people when the reality is liberal legislation has always cost more than intended, does less than intended and never solves a problem. This liberal legislation will be no different. Also liberal arrogance is no different. Different set of liberals, more spending, great debt, and the problems not solved.
 
Conservative said:
You need to learn more about individual responsibility and stop with your attempts at social engineering. It actually is you that doesn't understand human behavior nor do you understand that this POS legislation does nothing to address the infrastructure thus quality and quantity of care.

The doctor problem is a serious problem that you want to sweep under the rug. You ignore how incentive affects supply and how many doctors will leave the profession because of this legislation when fully implemented. On paper liberal legislation sounds good to a select group of people when the reality is liberal legislation has always cost more than intended, does less than intended and never solves a problem. This liberal legislation will be no different. Also liberal arrogance is no different. Different set of liberals, more spending, great debt, and the problems not solved.
Click to expand...

Individual responsibility is having insurance. Those who don't are not being responsible.

And no, it is not that serious. The doctor shortage is a problem, but not one that negates everything. No, it is not that large.
 
Boo Radley said:
Individual responsibility is having insurance. Those who don't are not being responsible.

And no, it is not that serious. The doctor shortage is a problem, but not one that negates everything. No, it is not that large.
Click to expand...

No, individual responsibility is whatever the individual deems necessary. Millions CHOOSE not to buy insurance. Telling a millionaire that he or she needs insurance is what liberals always do. Stick to your own business and let those people decide for themselves.

The doctor shortage is a problem and going to get worse when the govt. adds millions to the roles of the insured and doctors drop out of the profession because of the increased work load and lower reimbursement rates. This bill does nothing to improve the quality or quantity of healthcare and no matter how many times you make the same argument the facts do not change nor does it become right.
 
Boo Radley said:
Individual responsibility is having insurance. Those who don't are not being responsible.

And no, it is not that serious. The doctor shortage is a problem, but not one that negates everything. No, it is not that large.
Click to expand...

Here is what that "individual responsibility" will cost individuals, consumers, and businesses? This is an example of social engineering. Please tell me how any of this creates more jobs thus more taxpayers and will boost the economy.

health-care-reform-tax-hikes-on-the-way: Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance
 
Conservative said:
No, individual responsibility is whatever the individual deems necessary. Millions CHOOSE not to buy insurance. Telling a millionaire that he or she needs insurance is what liberals always do. Stick to your own business and let those people decide for themselves.

The doctor shortage is a problem and going to get worse when the govt. adds millions to the roles of the insured and doctors drop out of the profession because of the increased work load and lower reimbursement rates. This bill does nothing to improve the quality or quantity of healthcare and no matter how many times you make the same argument the facts do not change nor does it become right.
Click to expand...

No, that's not true. An individual can be irresponsible. They can deem that driving at 100 mph with a blindfold on, drinking beer, and in the nude is responsible. It wouldn't be.

And no, the shortage will likely get better as the government offers more incentive.
 
Boo Radley said:
No, that's not true. An individual can be irresponsible. They can deem that driving at 100 mph with a blindfold on, drinking beer, and in the nude is responsible. It wouldn't be.

And no, the shortage will likely get better as the government offers more incentive.
Click to expand...

Yep, a lot of people can be irresponsible and prove it every day. Obama was elected and that change that these people voted for is now amounting to changing everything they believed in before voting for this empty suit.

You cannot legislate the elimination of irresponsibility although I wish we could. That would mean every politician in D.C. would be out on the street.

Govt. incentive to get into the business will be offset by the reduction in financial incentive once in the business. Lowering payments for Medicare and Medicaid will not provide the incentive to keep doctors in the business.

Think for a change instead of continuing to feel.
 
Conservative said:
Yep, a lot of people can be irresponsible and prove it every day. Obama was elected and that change that these people voted for is now amounting to changing everything they believed in before voting for this empty suit.

You cannot legislate the elimination of irresponsibility although I wish we could. That would mean every politician in D.C. would be out on the street.

Govt. incentive to get into the business will be offset by the reduction in financial incentive once in the business. Lowering payments for Medicare and Medicaid will not provide the incentive to keep doctors in the business.

Think for a change instead of continuing to feel.
Click to expand...

So, you concede my point? ;)

And there is no reduction in financial incentive.
 
Boo Radley said:
So, you concede my point? ;)

And there is no reduction in financial incentive.
Click to expand...

What? No reduction in incentive? Wow, what a response! Since when is financial compensation not incentive?

Amazing, guess I need to revert to reality, when a political opponent is committing political suicide stand back, get out of the way, and let them do it.

You are digging yourself a bigger hole so carry on.
 
Conservative said:
What? No reduction in incentive? Wow, what a response! Since when is financial compensation not incentive?

Amazing, guess I need to revert to reality, when a political opponent is committing political suicide stand back, get out of the way, and let them do it.

You are digging yourself a bigger hole so carry on.
Click to expand...

There is plenty of financial compensation. Some even increased.

Physician Compensation : HEALTH REFORM WATCH
 
Boo Radley said:
There is plenty of financial compensation. Some even increased.

Physician Compensation : HEALTH REFORM WATCH
Click to expand...

Another op ed piece that once again defies reality. Too many taxes in this bill to create that financial incentive that you care about and when you cut billions out of Medicare and pass billions on to the states for Medicaid which will be passed on to doctors in the form of lower reimbursements you get fewer doctors, that is logic 101.

Met with my wife's cancer doctor on Monday and he expressed what I have been stating all along, more doctors are going to stop taking Medicare and Medicaid patients because of govt. regulations and lower payments. They will get out of the business before they allow the govt. to control their income more than it already does. That is from a doctor. The polls are showing what the American people think but polls seem to only matter when they are on the side of liberals.
 
Conservative said:
Another op ed piece that once again defies reality. Too many taxes in this bill to create that financial incentive that you care about and when you cut billions out of Medicare and pass billions on to the states for Medicaid which will be passed on to doctors in the form of lower reimbursements you get fewer doctors, that is logic 101.

Met with my wife's cancer doctor on Monday and he expressed what I have been stating all along, more doctors are going to stop taking Medicare and Medicaid patients because of govt. regulations and lower payments. They will get out of the business before they allow the govt. to control their income more than it already does. That is from a doctor. The polls are showing what the American people think but polls seem to only matter when they are on the side of liberals.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with an op-ed as long as it is accurate. It explains things well.

And I doubt your doctor. And no, they won't get out of the business. Washing dishes really doesn't pay that much. ;)
 
Boo Radley said:
Nothing wrong with an op-ed as long as it is accurate. It explains things well.

And I doubt your doctor. And no, they won't get out of the business. Washing dishes really doesn't pay that much. ;)
Click to expand...

No he won't get out of the business but he won't be accepting Medicare and Medicaid patients. Think, man, think. You aren't nearly as smart as you think.

The op ed piece doesn't take into affect human behavior at all. Typical liberal theory that trumps reality and facts.
 
Boo Radley said:
And no, the shortage will likely get better as the government offers more incentive.
Click to expand...

now wait a minute. every poll among providers indicates that the supply is going to shrink. the incentives offered to providers by the government are going to be negative. how in the world does reducing the supply of providers lower cost and increase availability?
 
Conservative said:
Another op ed piece that once again defies reality.
Click to expand...

It's not an op ed, it's a factual article that quotes directly from the law, by people who know what they're talking about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom