RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall

RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

bounty44 -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 5:57:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy You're an sharp thinker indeed. The idea of the mandate is to stop free loaders from having everyone else pay their medical bills. In order to drive an auto, it's mandated that you have auto insurance. This is common good sense, and as such, if flies far over your head. Citizens of the the United States should contribute to it, and be proud and willing to do so. Free loaders can piss off. All that deep reading you claim to do, did you somehow miss the memo about how the ACA has expanded medical coverage to millions of uninsured Americans while lowering health care costs? with at least one of the major differences being comrade head in the clouds that if I chose not to drive or own a car, I am not compelled to have car insurance. explain how that makes me a freeloader? apparently the "common sense here flies over your head?"

Sanity -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 6:01:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy You're an sharp thinker indeed. The idea of the mandate is to stop free loaders from having everyone else pay their medical bills. In order to drive an auto, it's mandated that you have auto insurance. This is common good sense, and as such, if flies far over your head. Citizens of the the United States should contribute to it, and be proud and willing to do so. Free loaders can piss off. All that deep reading you claim to do, did you somehow miss the memo about how the ACA has expanded medical coverage to millions of uninsured Americans while lowering health care costs? with at least one of the major differences being comrade head in the clouds that if I chose not to drive or own a car, I am not compelled to have car insurance. explain how that makes me a freeloader? apparently the "common sense here flies over your head?" A leftist boy ranting on about 'freeloaders' is incredibly hypocritical

StWrinklemeat -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 6:43:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Insanity A leftist boy ranting on about 'freeloaders' is incredibly hypocritical A rightist toiletlicker pretending that nutsuckers are not all leeches on American citizenry is incredibly hypocritcal. http://aattp.org/ts-official-white-folks-in-red-states-are-the-biggest-food-stamp-moochers-in-the-country/ Well, there you go again, Your Idol, St. Wrinklemeat

cloudboy -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 7:44:53 AM)
There's always the fact about Red States freeloading off Blue States too.

KenDckey -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 8:25:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: Insanity A leftist boy ranting on about 'freeloaders' is incredibly hypocritical A rightist toiletlicker pretending that nutsuckers are not all leeches on American citizenry is incredibly hypocritcal. http://aattp.org/ts-official-white-folks-in-red-states-are-the-biggest-food-stamp-moochers-in-the-country/ Well, there you go again, Your Idol, St. Wrinklemeat and of course there are those that can't make a point without followng the view that insults win arguments.

StWrinklemeat -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 8:44:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: Insanity A leftist boy ranting on about 'freeloaders' is incredibly hypocritical A rightist toiletlicker pretending that nutsuckers are not all leeches on American citizenry is incredibly hypocritcal. http://aattp.org/ts-official-white-folks-in-red-states-are-the-biggest-food-stamp-moochers-in-the-country/ Well, there you go again, Your Idol, St. Wrinklemeat and of course there are those that can't make a point without followng the view that insults win arguments. And there are nutsuckers, whose modus operandi is to spew lying fucking propaganda while using innuendo and impugnation as the very basis of their posts, as we see in the OP. Certainly, none of the nutsucker spewed cockgargling has ever won any argument in the real world or this forum, since it is provably smear and untruthful at its core.

KenDckey -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 8:59:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: Insanity A leftist boy ranting on about 'freeloaders' is incredibly hypocritical A rightist toiletlicker pretending that nutsuckers are not all leeches on American citizenry is incredibly hypocritcal. http://aattp.org/ts-official-white-folks-in-red-states-are-the-biggest-food-stamp-moochers-in-the-country/ Well, there you go again, Your Idol, St. Wrinklemeat and of course there are those that can't make a point without followng the view that insults win arguments. And there are nutsuckers, whose modus operandi is to spew lying fucking propaganda while using innuendo and impugnation as the very basis of their posts, as we see in the OP. Certainly, none of the nutsucker spewed cockgargling has ever won any argument in the real world or this forum, since it is provably smear and untruthful at its core. More name calling. Oh that helps a lot.

StWrinklemeat -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 11:12:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: Insanity A leftist boy ranting on about 'freeloaders' is incredibly hypocritical A rightist toiletlicker pretending that nutsuckers are not all leeches on American citizenry is incredibly hypocritcal. http://aattp.org/ts-official-white-folks-in-red-states-are-the-biggest-food-stamp-moochers-in-the-country/ Well, there you go again, Your Idol, St. Wrinklemeat and of course there are those that can't make a point without followng the view that insults win arguments. And there are nutsuckers, whose modus operandi is to spew lying fucking propaganda while using innuendo and impugnation as the very basis of their posts, as we see in the OP. Certainly, none of the nutsucker spewed cockgargling has ever won any argument in the real world or this forum, since it is provably smear and untruthful at its core. More name calling. Oh that helps a lot. In comparison to the lying shit in your OP, do you think it helps more or less than pointing it out does? Again, you can't post fucking diarheaa and expect some honest, rational, considered debate to spring from it, you spew horseshit, thats all you get back.

Sanity -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 11:47:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: Insanity A leftist boy ranting on about 'freeloaders' is incredibly hypocritical A rightist toiletlicker pretending that nutsuckers are not all leeches on American citizenry is incredibly hypocritcal. http://aattp.org/ts-official-white-folks-in-red-states-are-the-biggest-food-stamp-moochers-in-the-country/ Well, there you go again, Your Idol, St. Wrinklemeat and of course there are those that can't make a point without followng the view that insults win arguments. And there are nutsuckers, whose modus operandi is to spew lying fucking propaganda while using innuendo and impugnation as the very basis of their posts, as we see in the OP. Certainly, none of the nutsucker spewed cockgargling has ever won any argument in the real world or this forum, since it is provably smear and untruthful at its core. More name calling. Oh that helps a lot. Oh, he's a leftist though. That's just about the best they can do

joether -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 12:26:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech My cognitive dissonance with the ACA is the simple fact that insurance in no way equates to health care availability. It is a law about mandatory insurance and nothing to reign in the rapidly spiraling upwards charges for any health care at all. Given that you didn't read the law, you would have no way of knowing what is in and not in the law. Nor how the law functions. The law does not require you to have health insurance. Nowhere in the document does it mention this. Which places it at odds with conservative media whom state you are required. That's right, there is the truth/facts and then there is FOX 'news'..... Likewise, the ACA (nor government through the ACA) dictate to private insurance companies what they can charge. So long as those charges keep to the standards of the four 'metal' codes of healthcare. That companies must raise rates due to any number of factors was true even before the ACA. But now, you, the individual citizen, have some protections. This all assumes the insurance companies are not colliding with each other.... quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech Healthcare in the U.S. has become huge corporate networks that only care about the quarterly bottom line. Isn't that Capitalism? To gouge someone over the barrel who needs a medical treatment or be in more pain (or even death)? Imagine when its a child that is being 'raked across the coals' by the insurance company? How many parents would go into high levels of debt (many hundreds of thousands of dollars)? Lose their house? Car(s)? Living savings? Every penny they have? Just to save their child? We could have better healthcare anytime we want. There are consequences to making it so. Can America live with those consequences? Good or bad?

KenDckey -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 12:30:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: Insanity A leftist boy ranting on about 'freeloaders' is incredibly hypocritical A rightist toiletlicker pretending that nutsuckers are not all leeches on American citizenry is incredibly hypocritcal. http://aattp.org/ts-official-white-folks-in-red-states-are-the-biggest-food-stamp-moochers-in-the-country/ Well, there you go again, Your Idol, St. Wrinklemeat and of course there are those that can't make a point without followng the view that insults win arguments. And there are nutsuckers, whose modus operandi is to spew lying fucking propaganda while using innuendo and impugnation as the very basis of their posts, as we see in the OP. Certainly, none of the nutsucker spewed cockgargling has ever won any argument in the real world or this forum, since it is provably smear and untruthful at its core. More name calling. Oh that helps a lot. In comparison to the lying shit in your OP, do you think it helps more or less than pointing it out does? Again, you can't post fucking diarheaa and expect some honest, rational, considered debate to spring from it, you spew horseshit, thats all you get back. He can speak intelegently. Cool. Now all we gotta do is stay on point with good conversation. :D

KenDckey -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 12:34:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech My cognitive dissonance with the ACA is the simple fact that insurance in no way equates to health care availability. It is a law about mandatory insurance and nothing to reign in the rapidly spiraling upwards charges for any health care at all. Given that you didn't read the law, you would have no way of knowing what is in and not in the law. Nor how the law functions. The law does not require you to have health insurance. Nowhere in the document does it mention this. Which places it at odds with conservative media whom state you are required. That's right, there is the truth/facts and then there is FOX 'news'..... Likewise, the ACA (nor government through the ACA) dictate to private insurance companies what they can charge. So long as those charges keep to the standards of the four 'metal' codes of healthcare. That companies must raise rates due to any number of factors was true even before the ACA. But now, you, the individual citizen, have some protections. This all assumes the insurance companies are not colliding with each other.... quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech Healthcare in the U.S. has become huge corporate networks that only care about the quarterly bottom line. Isn't that Capitalism? To gouge someone over the barrel who needs a medical treatment or be in more pain (or even death)? Imagine when its a child that is being 'raked across the coals' by the insurance company? How many parents would go into high levels of debt (many hundreds of thousands of dollars)? Lose their house? Car(s)? Living savings? Every penny they have? Just to save their child? We could have better healthcare anytime we want. There are consequences to making it so. Can America live with those consequences? Good or bad? Joe I personally suspect that the moderator of the collusion that you speak of is Obama or one of his flunkies. As for the consequences you speak of, I believe yes.

joether -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 12:34:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey https://krisheldmd.wordpress.com/2015/08/27/dear-3rd-party-player-ive-had-it-and-im-not-takig-this-sitting-down-anymore-appeal-this/ Even this doctor agrees that Insurance companies are practicing medicine without a license. You or I try that and we would go to jail. But not those protected by government. Simple fix would be to hold the insurance company to the same high standards we force (by law) onto medical doctors and other medical perssonel. Of course doing that would be SOCIALISM. To which all the conservatives and libertarians in the nation would be fully against. That's right, they want better healthcare but it should 'magically' happen on its own. Talk about 'living life with head up one's ass'! We as a nation tried that for thirty years. It didn't work. Placing insurance companies to exacting standards would imply we dictate their gross profit from year to year. Like what we do with power companies. Will there be consequences to this? Yes. So we as a society will have to determine what 'good' and 'bad' circumstances we can live with long term.

joether -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 12:39:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey Joe I personally suspect that the moderator of the collusion that you speak of is Obama or one of his flunkies. As for the consequences you speak of, I believe yes. An what evidence from non-conservative-propaganda sources does this come from? You distrust the guy. I 'get that'. That he is more educated than you, I also 'get it'. Another reason why you dislike him. Yet, the guy wants more for the bottom 99% than the 1%. That much is apparent in his writing and speeches. An he can not do much thanks to the 'Do Nothing Republican/Tea Party Congress'. If you have problems with healthcare; perhaps you should example the GOP/TP more closely. Those people....WANT...to have you over a barrel with the insurance company. It just means more donations for their re-election campaigns.....

KenDckey -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 12:42:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey https://krisheldmd.wordpress.com/2015/08/27/dear-3rd-party-player-ive-had-it-and-im-not-takig-this-sitting-down-anymore-appeal-this/ Even this doctor agrees that Insurance companies are practicing medicine without a license. You or I try that and we would go to jail. But not those protected by government. Simple fix would be to hold the insurance company to the same high standards we force (by law) onto medical doctors and other medical perssonel. Of course doing that would be SOCIALISM. To which all the conservatives and libertarians in the nation would be fully against. That's right, they want better healthcare but it should 'magically' happen on its own. Talk about 'living life with head up one's ass'! We as a nation tried that for thirty years. It didn't work. Placing insurance companies to exacting standards would imply we dictate their gross profit from year to year. Like what we do with power companies. Will there be consequences to this? Yes. So we as a society will have to determine what 'good' and 'bad' circumstances we can live with long term. I take it that you are suggesting that we tell doctors and other healthcare providers and insurance companies can make every month. I don't see that as providing much better healthcare when non-medical personnel are deciding health issues and can over rule healthcare providers, the crux of this thread.

StWrinklemeat -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 1:16:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey He can speak intelegently. Cool. Now all we gotta do is stay on point with good conversation. :D I have been speaking intelligently all along, the point is that your OP is lying propaganda, in other words, not true. Now, we should go single payer, nationalized, and de-corporatize hospitals and insurance companies.

joether -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 1:21:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey https://krisheldmd.wordpress.com/2015/08/27/dear-3rd-party-player-ive-had-it-and-im-not-takig-this-sitting-down-anymore-appeal-this/ Even this doctor agrees that Insurance companies are practicing medicine without a license. You or I try that and we would go to jail. But not those protected by government. Simple fix would be to hold the insurance company to the same high standards we force (by law) onto medical doctors and other medical perssonel. Of course doing that would be SOCIALISM. To which all the conservatives and libertarians in the nation would be fully against. That's right, they want better healthcare but it should 'magically' happen on its own. Talk about 'living life with head up one's ass'! We as a nation tried that for thirty years. It didn't work. Placing insurance companies to exacting standards would imply we dictate their gross profit from year to year. Like what we do with power companies. Will there be consequences to this? Yes. So we as a society will have to determine what 'good' and 'bad' circumstances we can live with long term. I take it that you are suggesting that we tell doctors and other healthcare providers and insurance companies can make every month. I don't see that as providing much better healthcare when non-medical personnel are deciding health issues and can over rule healthcare providers, the crux of this thread. Did I say doctors and healthcare providers? No. I stated healthcare insurance companies. Before the ACA existed, there was a vast number of people whom were non-medical personnel deciding health care issues to every person in the nation. Did you have a problem with that? You have to state 'no' here; otherwise your full of shit! You can't say 'yes' and be against President Obama and the ACA at the same time. Sorry, you can't have it both ways! How do we provide good healthcare to Americans? Take the issue of the bill out of the picture. How do we do that? Get a better economy system for the nation? How do we accomplish this? Good question.... Whomever answers that question well, earns the Nobel Prize for Medicine and Economics! Maybe even Peace.....

KenDckey -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 1:29:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey quote: ORIGINAL: StWrinklemeat quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey He can speak intelegently. Cool. Now all we gotta do is stay on point with good conversation. :D I have been speaking intelligently all along, the point is that your OP is lying propaganda, in other words, not true. Now, we should go single payer, nationalized, and de-corporatize hospitals and insurance companies. So if I understand you correctly, the polls (right ones, left ones, center ones) that show that the majority of Americans are unhappy with ACA are lying. I am not sure our country would stand still for the government controlling our healthcare, much less nationalizing business.

StWrinklemeat -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 1:56:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey So if I understand you correctly, the polls (right ones, left ones, center ones) that show that the majority of Americans are unhappy with ACA are lying. I am not sure our country would stand still for the government controlling our healthcare, much less nationalizing business. No, you dont understand anything, and certainly not your OP. Nutsuckers hold an unfavorable view. It is a nutsucker poll, by nutsuckers, for nutsuckers and its a poll, and meaningless. no data or methods are given, it is from a nutsucker focus group. So, you don't understand very much correctly, if I understand you correctly. And you appear to be unsure about other matters.

KenDckey -> RE: ACA still viewed as unfavorable overall (8/28/2015 2:20:19 PM)
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html OK here are the polls for you Overall oppose average 8% higher than those agree. Last I heard that is a majority.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875