Yet another thing you would be wrong about.
It does have bearing as to insight into what progressives think should be done in a Single payer system. And how is it being "misrepresented?
You're not discussing anything with progressives, or liberals, or any other silly group. You discussing with me, and it has no bearing on anything I've said.
Only because you didn't listen to it. Largely because I don't think you want an honest discussion on this, you want to have people agree with you or you will distract, dismiss, and attack.
Again, you are wrong. And again, it had no bearing.
Why don't you honestly debate this instead of constantly trying to inflame your opponent?
J, what you said was silly and off point. What do you expect?
Not if the government has control, then you just get less, and pay more.
define control? We're only talking about a payer. They don't control anything other than what they will pay for. You can buy anything else you want. Again, you're off somewhere other than discussing what is before you.
Where do you get 'fires' with your burger? :wink: But no listen, you give a wonderful analogy here as to why we shouldn't let government anywhere near this. And that is simply the ala cart phenomena, see here you are talking about buying a burger, then ordering a side order of fries, when you could just get the meal deal and pay less.
I can get them at all kinds of different places if I choose. And I can get the entire meal as well. It is up to me.
The mistake is in humoring this aspect of the discussion in the first place. This is about HHS forcing through regulation something on the church which is against their beliefs.
You might try actually having the discussion. You haven't done that yet. And like CP, you often either miss the meat of the content, or you deliberately seek to bury the content so you don't have to address it. Debating stereotypes is easier.
That is because no one want's a single payer system, other than those that don't like what America is.
If it was what you describe, i wouldn't want it either. But since it isn't, we should first look at what it really is.
I am free to do that now. But why should I pay for yours? What is the origin of debt that I have to those without insurance?
"likely" is a wonderfully weasely word isn't it Joe? Because it allows you to seemingly get your way as things are debated, then when it turns south in practice, you get the luxury of saying, that isn't what I said, I said likely......Why don't you stick with facts instead of weasel words like, "likely"....
I'm sorry j, I could be all stupid, like using out of context clips, but until something specific is proposed, we have to use words like "likely." The fact is there are many types of single payer systems, and we'd "LIKELY" have a two tiered system here, if not multiple tiered.
Explain my origin of indebtedness to them.
No one said you were.Nor was that point. Now read all the sentences together.
That is because it is a statement, not a response.
Do you see the problem with that? It should be lin to responding to a point. Random statements are kind of useless.
Says you...But see, that is the funny thing with those that disagree with you....Just because you type/say something, doesn't make it true.
J, facts are not opinions. Disagreement doesn't come into play with them. You still don't seem to know much about single payer systems.
Playing games again I see...I must be hitting home....
You say things off topic and silly, and I'm playing games? Do you really believe this?
Like much here, you are dead wrong Joe.
j-mac
No, j, I've given you factual information. it is you who don't know what a single payer system is.
