Debate: The ACA is a Republican plan through and through (TUH's Proof vs. BarNone's Proof))

[theworldismine13]

Because somehow through some glitch you posted before my post was finished, I don't even know how you saw it...I had it as a draft. So I was giving you the opportunity to respond to my actual post. The reason I said I can re-post is so that you don't have to start from scratch so calm down. There is nothing un-kosher about a site glitch.

a site glitch? a glitch that just happened to be you ethering yourself?

ill let it slide this time

 

[No1]

a site glitch? a glitch that just happened to be you ethering yourself?

ill let it slide this time

I didn't ether myself, I was helping you not look foolish. I can restore your post right now if it makes you feel better, but you already lost due to your lack of reading comprehension.

 

[theworldismine13]

I didn't ether myself, I was helping you not look foolish. I can restore your post right now if it makes you feel better, but you already lost due to your lack of reading comprehension.

there was nothing foolish, in your post you said something to the effect that "except for the mandate and the exchange", which is silly when that is the point that tuh is making, the details might be different but the fact that both obama care and the republican plan depend on mandates and exchanges proves tuh's point

tuh is focusing on the fundamentals which is appropriate, you are basing your argument on bureaucratic details which isnt appropriate

i dont care if you put my post or not but in the future its better to not delete my posts or anybody's post unless they are breaking some rule

 

[DEAD7]

there was nothing foolish, in your post you said something to the effect that "except for the mandate and the exchange", which is silly when that is the point that tuh is making, the details might be different but the fact that both obama care and the republican plan depend on mandates and exchanges proves tuh's point

tuh is focusing on the fundamentals which is appropriate, you are basing your argument on bureaucratic details which isnt appropriate

i dont care if you put my post or not but in the future its better to not delete my posts or anybody's post unless they are breaking some rule

 

[Type Username Here]

He has a history of doing these things to threads and posts that are critical to Democrats. Notice above how he says "It's time to deal this thread" (meant to say dead I am assuming).

The fact is dead made a poorly allocated table as a retort showing that my criticisms were actually legit. TWISM hit the nail in the head, all the major components are taken directly from Republican plans but he points out the minor differences as proof.

If you like the Republican plan, just come out and say it. There is no denying that it is to anyone who can read at a 4th grade level.

Just stop pretending.

 

[Blackking]

Name me the list of key concepts that are entirely GOP concepts. I will wait. I will spot you the mandate and the exchanges (which work different than how Repubs intended back in 1993...this is probably the most annoying part that people won't grasp) Go ahead, the article above outlines them which I'm becoming increasingly convinced that none of you read.

I hope you understand the argument you're forcing yourself to make... (but this is my last post on what is a stupid argument...that I just had to address).
.

lol, how are you going to ask a loaded and manipulative question like that, I guess that's because ur a lawyer.

I see that you didn't ask key GOP concepts... You said ENTIRELY gop concepts... then you said how the gop 'intended'. Are the mandate and the exchanges not considered key concepts?

Anyway, I don't wanna get into debate. Let's just be friends and admit that the GOP isn't as bytchmade as the Dem. So many GOP policies have went through without a real fight or effort. This policy (ACA) is made pussible, because the Dems are too weak to push single payer or anything that is leaning socialist...without big business and others getting to still eat good. The individual madates n other details were created while Bush #1 was still pres as a JUST IN CASE measure to anything the Liberals could come up with in the future.
If liberals pushed healthcare reform they would have to do it on conservative terms ---- exchanges, mandates, penalties, penalites excalating after each year that passes, etc. All of the things that are considered KEY in the bill are meant to take the heat off businesses (big business) and put on tax payers and families. IT follows the same line of thought that every GOP domestic policy follows - Individual responsibility based on the idea that in a trickle down economy you do not want to force big business with too much burden. Romney wasn't the first GOP member to talk the insurance exchange talk, but he most known for it.


This is just some BS to make liberals feel good and to help out obama legacy.

Anyway didn't u go to wack ass MI U? This state is at the center of this shyt. The only governor in the nation that is walking with the True Reagan Swag is Snyder. He's the only person in either party that is staying 100% with ideology and concepts. Therefore, even on this issue.... They are considering expanding medicade and avoiding the exchanges (a GOP idea originally). They don't care what concepts they keep as long as it can maximize personal responsibility and decrease the burden on businesses.
http://america.aljazeera.com/articl...le-overobamacarebecomesfightforsoulofgop.html

 

[theworldismine13]

He has a history of doing these things to threads and posts that are critical to Democrats. Notice above how he says "It's time to deal this thread" (meant to say dead I am assuming).

The fact is dead made a poorly allocated table as a retort showing that my criticisms were actually legit. TWISM hit the nail in the head, all the major components are taken directly from Republican plans but he points out the minor differences as proof.

If you like the Republican plan, just come out and say it. There is no denying that it is to anyone who can read at a 4th grade level.

Just stop pretending.

word, i admit it freely,i think its too early to say its good but overall but i think obamacare is good so far, i think the free market aspect of it is great and i have no interest in single payer and i have no idea why yall are obsessed with single payer

 

[DEAD7]

I dont think it matters which side of the isle it came from originally tbh. Both the economic and political climate are completely different today.(domestic and foreign)

Not copping a plea for republicans, just stating an obvious fact.

 

[OneManGang]

Me: Do you support privatizing schools and using vouchers?
Typical Democrat/Obama Worshiper: No, that's a Republican plan and will have unintended consequences. It puts profits over people.

Me: Do you support getting rid of unions and letting Businesses decide the welfare of the worker and labor practices?
Typical Democrat/Obama Worshiper: No, that's a Republican plan and will have unintended consequences. It puts profits over people.

Me: Do you support privatizing social security?
Typical Democrat/Obama Worshiper: No, that's a Republican plan and will have unintended consequences. It puts profits over people.

Me: Do you support privatizing prisons?
Typical Democrat/Obama Worshiper: No, that's a Republican plan and will have unintended consequences. It puts profits over people.

Me: Do you support privatizing healthcare?
Typical Democrat/Obama Worshiper: Well, you see, this will allow more people to join into the privatized health care system and the health insurance companies will eventually help us go to public healthcare because they will not use their profits to lobby against it. Corporations aren't bad, they will keep our interests at heart in this case. Yea, it borrows from a Republican plan but Democrats now LOVE this Republican corporate plan, and I should too.

When you put it this way....

 

[TheReal_Broke_88m3_13]

When you put it this way....

I'm saying how often do we see large corporations have the general public's best interest at mind....

 

[No1]

there was nothing foolish, in your post you said something to the effect that "except for the mandate and the exchange", which is silly when that is the point that tuh is making, the details might be different but the fact that both obama care and the republican plan depend on mandates and exchanges proves tuh's point

tuh is focusing on the fundamentals which is appropriate, you are basing your argument on bureaucratic details which isnt appropriate

i dont care if you put my post or not but in the future its better to not delete my posts or anybody's post unless they are breaking some rule

First and foremost, don't tell me what the rules are. Second, I straight up told you when they it got deleted I was going to restore it or just copy and paste it for you so that chronologically it made sense. You like everyone else in here ignored the Forbes article and my post doing a direct comparison because it shuts down your plan. Third, you are entirely foolish and TUH is backing you because you supported sis uneducated and lack of nuanced understanding of anything involving healthcare in this country. This post and this entire thread is one of the few times I've ever posted on this board where I'm literally offending by people's ignorance that they believe to be proper understanding.

It is established that this plan is closer to the plan in Mass not the 1993 plan. What makes you off is that you are (a) holding onto that point and that you do not comprehend that the way the exchange and the mandate operates make the complete difference. The other plan lacked an employer mandate. It did not set a baseline for coverage and according to Romney was geared towards catastrophic coverage. It did provide for increased medicaid and medicare coverage. It did not create so many of the organizations that this bill creates. These are not bureaucratic details these are the building block components of the bill and how it attempts to control costs and to prevent lowest quality care.

I'm offended that your over-generalizing, and consistently basic interpretation of any and all situations is being applied in this situation. More importantly I'm annoyed that any you think that you have a greater grasp of plans crafted by New Englanders (1993 plan and Romneycare) than the person who is from New England and has been much closer to them than you will ever be. I would love to see you attempt to refute the Forbes article or my post with the direct comparison, but you won't because you can't and apparently you don't know what the word "bureaucratic" means either. This is my last post on this subject, I've never lost so much respect for people's comprehension skills on my time on this board.

 

[Type Username Here]

word, i admit it freely,i think its too early to say its good but overall but i think obamacare is good so far, i think the free market aspect of it is great and i have no interest in single payer and i have no idea why yall are obsessed with single payer

Single payer to me is a compromise. I would very much like a nationalized health care system.

I expect you to think the free market aspect of it is great. I respect your honesty and principles, even though I think you've bought into this Reaganomics fairytale. My problem is with these spineless, dishonest, and hypocritical cowards masquerading as leftists/progressives. The type of cats who wake up and read politico to find out what are today's White House talking points and then proceed to regurgitate it.

I dont think it matters which side of the isle it came from originally tbh. Both the economic and political climate are completely different today.(domestic and foreign)

Not copping a plea for republicans, just stating an obvious fact.

My point exactly. I feel that I need to demonstrate just how far right "progressives" in this country have come. On Social issues we have maintained some gain on the LGBT rights, minor drug reform and localized issues, but otherwise these politicians just added to what Reagan did. The new Democratic party, since about 1980, has been in lock step with Reaganomics, War on Drugs, M-I-C, Corporatism. I'm not naive to think it didn't happen prior to Reagan, but there was a very evident shift, even among the voting liberal public.

I don't believe in that Reagan shyt. I don't care that it is coming from the mouth of a Democrat President or Senator.

 

[theworldismine13]

First and foremost, don't tell me what the rules are. Second, I straight up told you when they it got deleted I was going to restore it or just copy and paste it for you so that chronologically it made sense. You like everyone else in here ignored the Forbes article and my post doing a direct comparison because it shuts down your plan. Third, you are entirely foolish and TUH is backing you because you supported sis uneducated and lack of nuanced understanding of anything involving healthcare in this country. This post and this entire thread is one of the few times I've ever posted on this board where I'm literally offending by people's ignorance that they believe to be proper understanding.

It is established that this plan is closer to the plan in Mass not the 1993 plan. What makes you foolish is that you are (a) holding onto that point and that you do not comprehend that the way the exchange and the mandate operates make the complete difference. The other plan lacked an employer mandate. It did not set a baseline for coverage and according to Romney was geared towards catastrophic coverage. It did provide for increased medicaid and medicare coverage. It did not create so many of the organizations that this bill creates. These are not bureaucratic details these are the building block components of the bill and how it attempts to control costs and to prevent lowest quality care. I'm offended that your over-generalizing, and consistently basic interpretation of any and all situations is being applied in this situation. More importantly I'm annoyed that any you think that you have a greater grasp of plans crafted by New Englanders (1993 plan and Romneycare) than the person who is from New England and has been much closer to them than you will ever be. I would love to see you attempt to refute the Forbes article or my post with the direct comparison, but you won't because you can't and apparently you don't know what the word "bureaucratic" means either. This is my last post on this subject, I've never lost so much respect for people's comprehension skills on my time on this board.

first and foremost, unless i broke a rule there is no reason to delete my post, period

second, im not sure why you think i dont understand your point, i understand your point completely, and like i said, you are just talking about bureaucratic issues, not the fundamentals, your point is correct that romneycare and obama care differ bureaucratically, but fundamentally, in its basic premises and assumptions its the same plan

 

[theworldismine13]

Single payer to me is a compromise. I would very much like a nationalized health care system.

I expect you to think the free market aspect of it is great. I respect your honesty and principles, even though I think you've bought into this Reaganomics fairytale. My problem is with these spineless, dishonest, and hypocritical cowards masquerading as leftists/progressives. The type of cats who wake up and read politico to find out what are today's White House talking points and then proceed to regurgitate it.

they both are bad ideas, i dont have a problem with the government providing health care as long as its not mandatory you sign up for it and as long as the government does not have a monopoly

 

[DEAD7]

they both are bad ideas, i dont have a problem with the government providing health care as long as its not mandatory you sign up for it and as long as the government does not have a monopoly