• 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!

Who do you hold at fault for the Govt shutdown?

Who is at fault for the shutdown?

  • Republicans

    Votes: 87 45.3%

  • Democrats

    Votes: 32 16.7%

  • Both

    Votes: 65 33.9%

  • Neither

    Votes: 8 4.2%
  • Total voters
    192
mac said:
Who, in your opinion, is primarily at fault for the shutdown?
Click to expand...

obama-reid-pelosi.jpg
 
americanwoman said:
So how come such a simple alternative plan wasn't brought in by republicans months or even years ago? Obamacare wasn't signed into law yesterday.
Click to expand...

Why should they? I pay for insurance, can't you pay for yours?
 
Sietske22 said:
All we need to do to end this crisis is let the House vote on a clean spending bill that ONLY funds the government and does nothing else.

Its very simple.

Why can't Boehner find some courage and do it?
Click to expand...

what about funding for Obamacare, you think money grows on trees for that?
 
Rocketman said:
obama-reid-pelosi.jpg
Click to expand...


I realize this is just your opinion, but it seemed so appropriate, I couldn't resist! ! :thumbs:

"A picture is worth a thousand words." Attributed to Frederick Barnard.
Greetings, Rocketman. :2wave:
 
Rocketman said:
Why should they? I pay for insurance, can't you pay for yours?
Click to expand...

Yes I can - I actually do pay for my own and for my family, why do you think I don't? Because I am for healthcare reform?

I don't know about you but I don't really like it when a 5 year old child with cancer is denied coverage and treatment by a company that pays it's CEO millions upon millions of dollars. Something is kinda wrong with that picture. You might be with the let the baby die, the ceo earns his money blah blah blah crowd but I prefer to have a heart.


edit: oh and as a healthy in-shape non tobacco young woman, I am probably paying more than my fair share for those who aren't so lucky healthwise and I could care less. :)
 
polgara said:
I realize this is just your opinion, but it seemed so appropriate, I couldn't resist! ! :thumbs:

"A picture is worth a thousand words." Attributed to Frederick Barnard.
Greetings, Rocketman. :2wave:
Click to expand...

thanks, those three have hurt my income, insurance costs, and future more than any other three I can remember. The sheep that follow them think they actually care about them.
 
americanwoman said:
Yes I can - I actually do pay for my own and for my family, why do you think I don't? Because I am for healthcare reform?

I don't know about you but I don't really like it when a 5 year old child with cancer is denied coverage and treatment by a company that pays it's CEO millions upon millions of dollars. Something is kinda wrong with that picture. You might be with the let the baby die, the ceo earns his money blah blah blah crowd but I prefer to have a heart.
Click to expand...

Show me any company that basis decisions from the heart. I have issue with parents that had that 5 year old child without coverage.
 
Rocketman said:
Show me any company that basis decisions from the heart. I have issue with parents that had that 5 year old child without coverage.
Click to expand...

Many people have coverage but are denied certain treatments. Let's say the baby was born with a birth defect, do you think it's right to classify that as a pre-existing condition and deny coverage in that instance?
 
americanwoman said:
Many people have coverage but are denied certain treatments. Let's say the baby was born with a birth defect, do you think it's right to classify that as a pre-existing condition and deny coverage in that instance?
Click to expand...

I think it is wrong to have that baby without coverage, that means knowing what is covered. Preparation is on you, not anyone else.
 
Rocketman said:
I think it is wrong to have that baby without coverage, that means knowing what is covered. Preparation is on you, not anyone else.
Click to expand...

So when you have the ultra sound and find out the baby has a birth defect and will not qualify for coverage, you are for abortion. Gotcha!
 
americanwoman said:
So when you have the ultra sound and find out the baby has a birth defect and will not qualify for coverage, you are for abortion. Gotcha!
Click to expand...

Thing is, if you truly asked those questions before having that child you would not be getting that answer. I have a grandchild with a defect, everything was covered but that answer was already known. I see you can't debate without extremism.
 
Visbek said:
To be clear, I don't hold it up as a "victory." What I'd say is that in many but not all respects, it is working. To wit:

• 97% of MA residents are now insured.
• It's got a 65% approval rating
• It's working well with the advent of ACO's
• Insurance premiums rose at half the rate of the rest of the US
• Insurers are not going bankrupt
• It hasn't bankrupted the state
Click to expand...

The only reason Massachusetts healthcare hasn't bankrupt the state providing coverage is because of the countless millions being provided by the federal government. Of all previously uninsured Massachusetts residents who obtained insurance after the reform became law, 83 percent did through publicly-funded programs, such as Commonwealth Care and MassHealth. Federal Medicaid funds underwrite about half the state’s cost. Yes Big Mama Federal government is subsidizing Romneycare in Massachusetts.





Nothing about the ACA changes the rates at which primary care physicians get paid; that's still between the doctor and the insurer. The only possible way it could have an effect is if the law results in more people going to see doctors.

And surely you are not going to hold up one and only statistic -- wait times for non-emergency care -- and on that basis declare that Romney's reforms are a disaster across the board?
Click to expand...

Sorry that is incorrect also. Because of Obamacare, Medicare payouts to physicians will see cuts also. For 2014, doctors face an estimated payment reduction of 25 percent on Medicare/Medicaid patients unless Congress passes another fix. The reason for the long wait to see a doctor in Massachusetts is directly related to all the bureaucracy involved with each individual. Processing it all, slows down on the number of patients a doctor can see per day. Just like Romneycare came with a whole new boatload of regulations, Obamacare does as well bringing with it a mess of red tape.
 
Rocketman said:
Thing is, if you truly asked those questions before having that child you would not be getting that answer. I have a grandchild with a defect, everything was covered but that answer was already known. I see you can't debate without extremism.
Click to expand...

I guess saying "it is wrong to have that baby without coverage" isn't the least bit extreme. :) Considering that with a list of pre-existing conditions that won't be covered by insurance, and for many instance those can't be detected until further along in the pregnancy, either you risk the pregnacy and then you might have a baby with a condtion that won't be covered, don't get pregnant so you don't risk it, or you abort the baby so you don't have a child that won't be covered.
 
Rocketman said:
thanks, those three have hurt my income, insurance costs, and future more than any other three I can remember. The sheep that follow them think they actually care about them.
Click to expand...

As I have posted before, my siblings are all Dems, and my two brothers have small businesses. Even they are unhappy and disappointed in BHO, and they get all nostalgic when referring to the past..."when we had lots of work." They attribute it to people not having jobs like they used to; hence no money to spend on new roofing or remodeling, etc, and they blame that on BHO's government policies.
 
americanwoman said:
I guess saying "it is wrong to have that baby without coverage" isn't the least bit extreme. :) Considering that with a list of pre-existing conditions that won't be covered by insurance, and for many instance those can't be detected until further along in the pregnancy, either you risk the pregnacy and then you might have a baby with a condtion that won't be covered, don't get pregnant so you don't risk it, or you abort the baby so you don't have a child that won't be covered.
Click to expand...

Of you whine about things that are bs ^, prepared parents don't have these issues
 
polgara said:
As I have posted before, my siblings are all Dems, and my two brothers have small businesses. Even they are unhappy and disappointed in BHO, and they get all nostalgic when referring to the past..."when we had lots of work." They attribute it to people not having jobs like they used to; hence no money to spend on new roofing or remodeling, etc, and they blame that on BHO's government policies.
Click to expand...

my company is French owned, 8 years ago this was their strongest market, it is now their weakest and they have been liquifying assets here for the last 4 years
 
Rocketman said:
my company is French owned, 8 years ago this was their strongest market, it is now their weakest and they have been liquifying assets here for the last 4 years
Click to expand...


:thumbdown: Sad to imagine everyone's stress levels at this point! !!!
 
Rocketman said:
Of you whine about things that are bs ^, prepared parents don't have these issues
Click to expand...

lol, even the most 'prepared' parents can be thrown a curveball finding out their child will have special needs. I am trying to be realistic here but I am not going to waste anymore time. I am sure the current healthcare system works great for you and I hope you have a great day. :2wave:
 
Jack Hays said:
Fair enough. I'm not a fan of single payer either, but it would not be the incoherent, coercive mess that is ACA. The good news about single payer is that in every country where it exists there is some means (within the system or otherwise) to get better care by paying more.:peace
Click to expand...

Agreed, but do we really want a 2-tier system where the 99% get the crappy neglect that passes for health care on the Indian reservations and the wealthy 1% have access to quality care? That strikes me as a recipe for a serious revolution.

Standing a bit further back to gain a larger perspective: We already know that we have a problem with entitlements that are unsupportable - Social Security, Medicare, defined benefit retirement programs and the like. Do we really need another entitlement program right now, particularly one with as murky a cost future as ObamaCare?

My own suggestion for a third, and final, Republican position is full funding for the rest of the government with the following restrictions on ObamaCare: (1) Delay the individual mandate for a year, but allow those who want to sign up to do so; (2) Repeal the awful 2.3% tax on medical devices (which applies to revenue, not profit, and sends jobs overseas); (3) No exemptions for Congress and staffers - the chefs must eat the same crap as they feed rest of us. If the Democrats feel that even these three modest requirements are worth holding the entire government hostage, let them explain their positions - and we will express our opinion at the polls next year.
 
Sietske22 said:
Right now Boehner is the man standing in the way of ending the shutdown.

All he has to do is let the House vote on a clean budget.
Click to expand...

A clean budget is out of the question. The last time the Senate passed a budget was way back before anybody had even heard of an iPad. We've been running on continuing resolutions ever since the Dems took over, with slight modifications each year to provide pork and grease the wheels of corruption for the party in power. The House has, several times, passed a clean continuing resolution for everything except Obamacare, the abomination that Obama has ignored every time he wishes to hand out an unconstitutional favor to his donors.

Boehner is the man standing up for America and Americans.
 
Sietske22 said:
The Senate took the House bill, stripped out the stuff that was unrelated to the Continuing Resolution, and sent it back to the House.

Boehner won't let them vote on it.

So much for democracy.
Click to expand...

Everything budget is related to the CR. :shrug:
 
americanwoman said:
lol, even the most 'prepared' parents can be thrown a curveball finding out their child will have special needs. I am trying to be realistic here but I am not going to waste anymore time. I am sure the current healthcare system works great for you and I hope you have a great day. :2wave:
Click to expand...

continue on with your beliefs, my mother used to read me a story like that:

sky-is-falling.jpg
 
Diogenes said:
Agreed, but do we really want a 2-tier system where the 99% get the crappy neglect that passes for health care on the Indian reservations and the wealthy 1% have access to quality care? That strikes me as a recipe for a serious revolution.

Standing a bit further back to gain a larger perspective: We already know that we have a problem with entitlements that are unsupportable - Social Security, Medicare, defined benefit retirement programs and the like. Do we really need another entitlement program right now, particularly one with as murky a cost future as ObamaCare?

My own suggestion for a third, and final, Republican position is full funding for the rest of the government with the following restrictions on ObamaCare: (1) Delay the individual mandate for a year, but allow those who want to sign up to do so; (2) Repeal the awful 2.3% tax on medical devices (which applies to revenue, not profit, and sends jobs overseas); (3) No exemptions for Congress and staffers - the chefs must eat the same crap as they feed rest of us. If the Democrats feel that even these three modest requirements are worth holding the entire government hostage, let them explain their positions - and we will express our opinion at the polls next year.
Click to expand...

No problem with any of that. You have obviously thought seriously about the question. Two minor points. OK with making Congresspersons and Senators drink the Kool-Aid, but I'd give the staffs a break. And in the single payer countries the better care is usually available a little further down the scale than the top 1%. Otherwise, count me in.:peace
 
Rocketman said:
continue on with your beliefs, my mother used to read me a story like that:

sky-is-falling.jpg
Click to expand...

Considering the right wing response to the passing of PPACA that image is particularly fitting.
 
Cardinal said:
Considering the right wing response to the passing of PPACA that image is particularly fitting.
Click to expand...

as the saying goes "out of left field" :lamo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom