Just when you thought it could not get worse. CBO report #2 out.

[Kiri]

That's why I do not support Trumpcare, it may be worse than the ACA. It's not just a matter of me not wanting to pay for others, the more important aspect of iot is not wanting to force others to pay for things they do not wish to have or use.

Oh? What are you guys fighting over then? I mean your 'I do not want to be forced to pay for others' stance kind of makes you look like an anti-ACA person, which currently is mostly equated to pro-TC. Plus some of the arguments you make are the same made by supporters of the bill. The 'I want healthcare to be affordable for everyone without me having to pay for it' stance is perfectly fine. People only take offense with 'I don't want to pay for others and don't care how others, especially the poor, manage to pay for it' one.
If you are simply arguing for the former, I am sorry for confusing you with the latter, and so should others.

What is stopping you from fleeing the country?

The American government is not sufficiently suppressive for anyone to apply for refugee status. Therefore, telling him to flee the country is pretty much akin to telling him to become an illegal immigrant in another country (getting a permanent visa in other countries is not exactly something done on short notice).

[Breccia]

What a group of fine sounding fellows.

You'd be surprised how easy it is for some people to get re-elected on the platform of being Pro Life.

[Machismo]

But that's what this is sort of about. The coverage isn't necessarily for you, it's protection for everyone else. Just because you're insured or have a ton of money doesn't mean you HAVE to undergo treatment. You can take a pass on chemo and go off and die if you want to. That's your choice. Having coverage just insures that everyone else doesn't get stuck footing your bill. It's the same reason states require auto liability insurance. It isn't ensure that you don't lose your house if at fault in accident, but rather to protect other people if you can't pay for damages.

But, the issue is being forced to pay for something, even if you don't want it, and will never use it. It removes the responsibility from the person, and gives it to the state.

[prwraith]

Show me where I want to kill anyone.

You've been shown about IDK 30 times over the course of this thread by various people. And you're best comeback is "Nope, try again". Why would the 31st time be any different.

[Breccia]

I am not sure how you berni-bots/bros are pumping your chest about how the ACA was great, when literally all it took was removing a mandate that forced (aka theft) people to either pay into or get taxed for , to make it crumble...

I am not sure how you humans are pumping your chest about how great humans are, when literally all it takes is removing one leg that forced (aka crippling) people to crumble.

The ACA had a lot of parts, but two of them were pivotal and related.
1) Everyone gets health care in some way.
2) Health care providers cannot prevent people from getting health care.

They worked together. A mandate, while allowing bans, turns into a punishment with no remedy. But removing the bans, with no mandate, adds only sick people to the system, dramatically increasing costs.

You don't get to say "removing one mandatory pillar of the system makes it crumble". That's what pillars are for. I recommend you educate yourself on the system before saying something as ill-informed as this again.

[Machismo]

What is stopping you from fleeing the country?

Why should I? So I can go to another country that does the exact same thing?

- - - Updated - - -

He's waiting for John Galt to come by and offer him his bar of gold.

I'm definitely no Randian.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh? What are you guys fighting over then? I mean your 'I do not want to be forced to pay for others' stance kind of makes you look like an anti-ACA person, which currently is mostly equated to pro-TC. Plus some of the arguments you make are the same made by supporters of the bill. The 'I want healthcare to be affordable for everyone without me having to pay for it' stance is perfectly fine. People only take offense with 'I don't want to pay for others and don't care how others, especially the poor, manage to pay for it' one.
If you are simply arguing for the former, I am sorry for confusing you with the latter, and so should others.



The American government is not sufficiently suppressive for anyone to apply for refugee status. Therefore, telling him to flee the country is pretty much akin to telling him to become an illegal immigrant in another country (getting a permanent visa in other countries is not exactly something done on short notice).

I am opposed to both the ACA and Trumpcares, and yes, even single payer. I would prefer that the government stop trying to be the solution.

[prwraith]

I am not sure how you berni-bots/bros are pumping your chest about how the ACA was great, when literally all it took was removing a mandate that forced (aka theft) people to either pay into or get taxed for , to make it crumble...

Any great program in which you describe would be able to stand upon its own two feet without needing legislation to rob the Middle and Upper Class. ACA was the largest transfer fricking payment ever made.

Nobody, literally nobody said the ACA was "great" or perfect or anything in this thread. Literally, yes literally, everyone is saying the ACA could use some pretty big improvements. There's a way to do it right and save this country trillions of dollars over the next 10 years.

But not with republicans. Which is sort of funny considering republicans like to blow their load all over the DoD consistently and then preach about how they want to save america money. And yet democrats seem to be the only ones who consistently do so.

[Machismo]

You've been shown about IDK 30 times over the course of this thread by various people. And you're best comeback is "Nope, try again". Why would the 31st time be any different.

Since I have no desire to cause anyone's death, their arguments are useless. They are trying to use emotion to paint me as an evil person. Choosing not to force my beliefs onto others is hardly an evil stance. It's certainly not one that involves me killing others.

- - - Updated - - -

Since I have no desire to cause anyone's death, their arguments are useless. They are trying to use emotion to paint me as an evil person. Choosing not to force my beliefs onto others is hardly an evil stance. It's certainly not one that involves me killing others.

Millions of people die every year in Africa due to poverty, famine, and tribal warfare. Are you the one killing them, because you aren't saving them?

[Mekh]

I'm definitely no Randian.

You sure do sound like one:

"I quit when medicine was placed under State control, some years ago. Do you know what it takes to perform a brain operation? Do you know the kind of skill it demands, and the years of passionate, merciless, excruciating devotion that go to acquire that skill? That was what I would not place at the disposal of men whose sole qualification to rule me was their capacity to spout the fraudulent generalities that got them elected to the privilege of enforcing their wishes at the point of a gun. I would not let them dictate the purpose for which my years of study had been spent, or the conditions of my work, or my choice of patients, or the amount of my reward. I observed that in all the discussions that preceded the enslavement of medicine, men discussed everything—except the desires of the doctors. Men considered only the 'welfare' of the patients, with no thought for those who were to provide it."

p. 744 ; Doctor Thomas Hendricks to Dagny Taggart

[Casterbridge]

I am not sure how you humans are pumping your chest about how great humans are, when literally all it takes is removing one leg that forced (aka crippling) people to crumble.

The ACA had a lot of parts, but two of them were pivotal and related.
1) Everyone gets health care in some way.
2) Health care providers cannot prevent people from getting health care.

They worked together. A mandate, while allowing bans, turns into a punishment with no remedy. But removing the bans, with no mandate, adds only sick people to the system, dramatically increasing costs.

You don't get to say "removing one mandatory pillar of the system makes it crumble". That's what pillars are for. I recommend you educate yourself on the system before saying something as ill-informed as this again.

I don't get why people don't understand this. I'm no huge fan of the ACA but it was step in the right direction, and to have it crippled at the outset and then have the one's who crippled it say 'see we told you it wouldn't work!' when it starts having issues is just ridiculous.

[Machismo]

You sure do sound like one:

"I quit when medicine was placed under State control, some years ago. Do you know what it takes to perform a brain operation? Do you know the kind of skill it demands, and the years of passionate, merciless, excruciating devotion that go to acquire that skill? That was what I would not place at the disposal of men whose sole qualification to rule me was their capacity to spout the fraudulent generalities that got them elected to the privilege of enforcing their wishes at the point of a gun. I would not let them dictate the purpose for which my years of study had been spent, or the conditions of my work, or my choice of patients, or the amount of my reward. I observed that in all the discussions that preceded the enslavement of medicine, men discussed everything—except the desires of the doctors. Men considered only the 'welfare' of the patients, with no thought for those who were to provide it."

p. 744 ; Doctor Thomas Hendricks to Dagny Taggart

Unlike Rand, I do not believe in objectivism. I do not think that selfishness is the key to humanity prospering. On that note, I do find the desire to tax others in order to pat for things one wants to be a selfish endeavor. Men like John Nash have shown her ideas to be wrong. However, I also do not believed that a forced government is required to gain such an end.

[Ol Scratch]

It was not implemented brilliantly, are you fucking serious? The technical problems were ridiculous. What should have taken a few people a month to set up, was botched by a multi-million dollar contract.

ROFL!

It never fails to make me laugh how many people point to a website's problems -- which had NOTHING AT ALL to do with the actual ACA itself (seriously, it's like saying that if a bakery closes unexpectedly because there was a death in the baker's family, somehow all of the baked goods he will ever produce forever will be defective somehow XD) -- as being the #1 proof positive of the ACA somehow being a horrible, horrible thing. XD

The best part? It was the GOP who went on the air and ranted on and on and on and on about it, knowing full well that the dim-witted citizens that keep them in power (DESPITE the GOP itself doing everything in its power to fuck them over at every god-damned turn!) would fall for it hook, line, and sinker. And they did. I mean, no they didn't, because those saps are in no way saps. <ahem>

But seriously it's okay, you're not brainwashed at all. True story, brah! The website had some issues for the first couple weeks because of how popular it was, and they weren't at all prepared for that massive popularity, ergo, it WAS THE WORST THING EVAR!!!! The GOP told you so, so it MUST be true! Bad website = bad act. Done deal. <dusts hands off>

And seriously, you people wonder why no one respects your opinions... XD

[prwraith]

Since I have no desire to cause anyone's death, their arguments are useless. They are trying to use emotion to paint me as an evil person. Choosing not to force my beliefs onto others is hardly an evil stance. It's certainly not one that involves me killing others.

They're not using emotions to paint you as an evil person. They're using your own posts. Which are inhumane and evil.

You're hiding behind "take responsibility" when the direct cause of your beliefs is MORE people die not LESS. Just because you refuse to follow what happens as a result of your policy makes you no less guilty of the fallout of your policy.

So yes please continue saying "I'm not evil, I just want people to take responsibility for themselves even though I know they can't afford it and will ultimately have a considerably shorter lifespan as a result"

Whatever you say dude.

[Machismo]

ROFL!

It never fails to make me laugh how many people point to a website's problems -- which had NOTHING AT ALL to do with the actual ACA itself (seriously, it's like saying that if a bakery closes unexpectedly because there was a death in the baker's family, somehow all of the baked goods he will ever produce forever will be defective somehow XD) -- as being the #1 proof positive of the ACA somehow being a horrible, horrible thing. XD

The best part? It was the GOP who went on the air and ranted on and on and on and on about it, knowing full well that the dim-witted citizens that keep them in power (DESPITE the GOP itself doing everything in its power to fuck them over at every god-damned turn!).

But it's okay, you're not brainwashed at all. The website had some issues for the first couple weeks because of how popular it was, and they weren't at all prepared for that massive popularity, ergo, it WAS THE WORST THING EVAR!!!! The GOP told you so, so it MUST be true! Bad website = bad act. Done deal. <dusts hands off>

And seriously, you people wonder why no one respects your opinions... XD

First off, they should have been prepared, they weren't. They should have anticipated everything that went wrong... they did not.

Most politicians never even read the bill they voted for... and still haven't. My bigger issue is with the bill itself, which was convoluted, hard to follow, restrictive, and loaded with pork and bribes.

[Kujako]

Unlike Rand, I do not believe in objectivism. I do not think that selfishness is the key to humanity prospering. On that note, I do find the desire to tax others in order to pat for things one wants to be a selfish endeavor. Men like John Nash have shown her ideas to be wrong. However, I also do not believed that a forced government is required to gain such an end.

Here's the thing, while the "desire to tax others in order to pay for things one wants" may be selfish, how is making a for profit business out of deciding who gets to live and die not? Health insurance is inherently selfish. Rand just wants to reward one form of selfishness, by getting rid of another. He is at the end of the day a corporatist not a libertarian.

[Machismo]

They're not using emotions to paint you as an evil person. They're using your own posts. Which are inhumane and evil.

You're hiding behind "take responsibility" when the direct cause of your beliefs is MORE people die not LESS. Just because you refuse to follow what happens as a result of your policy makes you no less guilty of the fallout of your policy.

So yes please continue saying "I'm not evil, I just want people to take responsibility for themselves even though I know they can't afford it and will ultimately have a considerably shorter lifespan as a result"

Whatever you say dude.

So, does that mean you are evil, because millions die every year in Africa due to disease, famine, and bloodshed? Let's be honest, since you are not doing more to help them, you are clearly evil, right? You are killing them.

[Tehshocka]

I am not sure how you humans are pumping your chest about how great humans are, when literally all it takes is removing one leg that forced (aka crippling) people to crumble.

The ACA had a lot of parts, but two of them were pivotal and related.
1) Everyone gets health care in some way.
2) Health care providers cannot prevent people from getting health care.

They worked together. A mandate, while allowing bans, turns into a punishment with no remedy. But removing the bans, with no mandate, adds only sick people to the system, dramatically increasing costs.

You don't get to say "removing one mandatory pillar of the system makes it crumble". That's what pillars are for. I recommend you educate yourself on the system before saying something as ill-informed as this again.

Ahhh the good ole education card. Considering I have BSEE, I feel pretty educated.

So you enjoy good ole fashioned theft I see since you failed to even cite the fact that now it was a requirement (aka forced upon) at the time to pay into a system (that worked for the poor and no one else), even if you didn't want it.

[Underverse]

Unlike Rand, I do not believe in objectivism. I do not think that selfishness is the key to humanity prospering. On that note, I do find the desire to tax others in order to pat for things one wants to be a selfish endeavor. Men like John Nash have shown her ideas to be wrong. However, I also do not believed that a forced government is required to gain such an end.

Ancap or ancom? Either way, the burden is on you to provide a shit ton of logical arguments that either system would work, instead of the frivolous 'it'll be fine, man!' bullshit I usually see from both of these groups.

[Machismo]

Here's the thing, while the "desire to tax others in order to pay for things one wants" may be selfish, how is making a for profit business out of deciding who gets to live and die not? Health insurance is inherently selfish. Rand just wants to reward one form of selfishness, by getting rid of another. He is at the end of the day a corporatist not a libertarian.

I didn't say companies aren't selfish, most of them are. Health insurance is selfish for whom? Is it selfish for the company, or for the people who decide to purchase it?

I was referring to Ayn Rand, not Rand Paul. I would agree, Rand Paul is a corporatist, much more so than his father.

[Ol Scratch]

First off, they should have been prepared, they weren't. They should have anticipated everything that went wrong... they did not.

SRSLY U GUIZ! The website had some issues the first few weeks, ERGO THE WHOLE THING WAS BAD FOREVER AND EVER!!!! The GOP told me so, so it MUST be true, and there's nothing wrong with this logic at all, for I am the most brilliant of the already brilliant Republican party member!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! (See, when you use excessive exclamation points, it makes you look smarter and your words more true. The GOP said so. So again, it has to be true!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Most politicians never even read the bill they voted for... and still haven't.

As opposed to... which bill?

My bigger issue is with the bill itself, which was convoluted, hard to follow, restrictive, and loaded with pork and bribes.

Sure it is, kid. That's why every post you've written on the subject started off with you crying about a website that was overloaded for a couple weeks. XD