obamaKare: the destruction begins

• gut

  Manhattan Buckeye;1529619 wrote:Obama administration thinks everyone is an idiot....but them.

  When the media is in your hip-pocket it's not an untenable position...
  
  But the entire liberal platform is basically dumbing-down your supporters and fooling them into thinking they're smart for accepting it. It's a proxy elitism thru pseud-intellectualism that is apparently appealing to many dipshits.
• believer

  

  gut;1529620 wrote:When the media is in your hip-pocket it's not an untenable position...
  
  But the entire liberal platform is basically dumbing-down your supporters and fooling them into thinking they're smart for accepting it. It's a proxy elitism thru pseud-intellectualism that is apparently appealing to many dipshits.

  Apparently? Definitely.
• believer

  

  By the way we have a plant-wide meeting today at 10 AM for an announcement on "major changes to our health care plan for 2014".
  
  Why is it I don't think we're going to get good news about lower monthly premiums and increased benefits?
• Manhattan Buckeye

  "But the entire liberal platform is basically dumbing-down your supporters and fooling them into thinking they're smart for accepting it."
  
  But this is what grinds my gears...most of my in-laws are very intelligent. Wife's uncle was a dean at Nebraska, wife's cousin is a Harvard Law grad and is a law professor at Colorado - they are very smart....yet still buy into this. Why?
• believer

  

  Manhattan Buckeye;1529624 wrote:"But the entire liberal platform is basically dumbing-down your supporters and fooling them into thinking they're smart for accepting it."
  
  But this is what grinds my gears...most of my in-laws are very intelligent. Wife's uncle was a dean at Nebraska, wife's cousin is a Harvard Law grad and is a law professor at Colorado - they are very smart....yet still buy into this. Why?

  Think about it for just a second. Liberalism breeds liberalism.
  
  For their entire adult lives - in particular their careers - they've been exposed to and actively profess the alleged virtues of liberalism. Most of their colleagues are liberals, their employers are likely liberals, and their education was in and of itself highly liberal.
  
  They've bought into the Big Kumbaya Lie even though deep down inside that still small voice of reason keeps nagging them, "are you really that stupid"?
  
  As intelligent as they are that cannot bring themselves to admit the failure. Their whole worldview would crumble. They'd have a massive meltdown. So in order to survive they ignore reality. It's like an alcoholic who refuses to admit he has a problem.
  
  Liberalism is a mental disorder: http://www.examiner.com/article/liberals-have-a-mental-disorder-says-doctor
• gut

  Manhattan Buckeye;1529624 wrote:"But the entire liberal platform is basically dumbing-down your supporters and fooling them into thinking they're smart for accepting it."
  
  But this is what grinds my gears...most of my in-laws are very intelligent. Wife's uncle was a dean at Nebraska, wife's cousin is a Harvard Law grad and is a law professor at Colorado - they are very smart....yet still buy into this. Why?

  It's the pied-piper of ideology.
  
  The goals of liberalism are very appealing. It's the execution and transition that are disastrous. That pretty well explains why smart people are seduced.
  
  Logically, it's compelling. From an academic/economic standpoint it's a disaster. Which is why liberals work so hard to diminish reality.
• BoatShoes

  Well this thread is bringing the lulz. Have any of you considered the possibility that perfectly reasonable can disagree, adhere to different values and/or have a different opinion on public policy that is worthy of something beyond outright derision and contempt?
  
  Medicare and Social Security are the most popular and successful programs in American history and have dramatically improved the lives of millions of Americans and it just so happened they were born from the womb of librulizm Gahh!!! The Federal Reserve System and Central Banking...st00pid librulz came out with that too. st00pid librulz!!! Why C@n'T thEy S33!?!?!?!
• ernest_t_bass

  

  Social Security is successful?
• sleeper

  

  Manhattan Buckeye;1529624 wrote:"But the entire liberal platform is basically dumbing-down your supporters and fooling them into thinking they're smart for accepting it."
  
  But this is what grinds my gears...most of my in-laws are very intelligent. Wife's uncle was a dean at Nebraska, wife's cousin is a Harvard Law grad and is a law professor at Colorado - they are very smart....yet still buy into this. Why?

  Let's be honest here, being a Harvard Law grad doesn't mean jack shit.
  
  Anyway, front page of the Wall Street Journal today talking about how young people aren't signing up even close to where they need to(gasp!). The average age for an Obamacare enrollee is about 50 and in order for the law to work it needs to be beneath 40. I think you'll see this law last 2 years at most before insurance companies start going under and the whole thing will be replaced with a single payer system.
• BoatShoes

  ernest_t_bass;1529686 wrote:Social Security is successful?

  LoL Yes. The Great Society was a fail but Social Security is and was the greatest anti-poverty program in the history of the United States. It keeps at least a fifth of all seniors out of poverty.
• BoatShoes

  like_that;1527516 wrote:Wow, you really dug down deep for that spin. Congrats.

  
  Not really. Akin to pointing out to a guy who consistently says he doesn't like women but that he likes tits, ass and purty long hair.
• sleeper

  

  BoatShoes;1529692 wrote:LoL Yes. The Great Society was a fail but Social Security is and was the greatest anti-poverty program in the history of the United States. It keeps at least a fifth of all seniors out of poverty.

  But at what cost?
• BoatShoes

  queencitybuckeye;1527426 wrote:There's far move evidence to reject this premise than to accept it.

  Oh c'mon no there isn't. You're a smart guy and surely you know some democrats. Do you think any of them seriously desire in their hearts to make things worse intentionally?
• gut

  You know, because the govt has been SOOOOO effective at reducing poverty...
• ernest_t_bass

  

  sleeper;1529695 wrote:But at what cost?

  Pfft... Cost doesn't matter!!!
• BoatShoes

  jmog;1527595 wrote: There is NO way around it, the country does NOT want this law no matter what you call it and no matter how you try to spin it.

  I'm not sure the "roll out" could've possibly been fucked up anymore than it was. It's not looking good for O-care right now. Hopefully we can pass Ron Johnson's bill (cold day in hell). Medicare didn't start off so well either and now generations have benefited from the law in the aggregate and Ronald Reagan was running around telling the country that we'd think back to the days when men were free from socialized medicine. The jury is still out on Obongocare.
• BoatShoes

  sleeper;1529695 wrote:But at what cost?

  Negligble social cost. Indeed, the utilitarian calculus yields a much greater societal benefit than cost. Seems to me that is indisputable. The case against it (IMHO), is on moral grounds that utilitarian social policies are illegitimate.
• BoatShoes

  gut;1529697 wrote:You know, because the govt has been SOOOOO effective at reducing poverty...

  
  Indeed, Medicare and Social Security have been fantastic at alleviating the poverty of seniors. A shame they all vote Republican because the Great Society was such a failure at alleviating the poverty of teh p00rz who ain't old and those terrible programs are more associated with modern liberalism than anything else...
• gut

  BoatShoes;1529711 wrote:Indeed, Medicare and Social Security have been fantastic at alleviating the poverty of seniors..

  Whatever. And ZIRP....not so much
• fish82

  

  http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/05/obama-denies-you-can-keep-it-videotaped-promises/
  

  President Barack Obama told his enthusiastic supporters Monday night that he never promised what video recordings show him promising at least 29 times.
  The videos show Obama promising 300 million Americans that “if you like your health-care plan, you will be able to keep your health-care plan, period.”
  
  
  But that’s not what he really said, Obama announced Monday in a speech to about 200 Organizing for Action supporters, gathered at the St. Regis hotel in D.C.
  “What we said was you could keep it if it hasn’t changed since the law was passed,” he told Obamacare’s political beneficiaries and contractors.
  
  
  That claim is not supported by his videotaped statements, which don’t include any mention of his new “if it hasn’t changed” exception.

  Impressive. Gotta give Obie credit for at least having the stones to keep doubling down on this.
• BoatShoes

  gut;1529717 wrote:Whatever. And ZIRP....not so much

  I'm sure you would much prefer a Eurozone style depression that resulting from the quagmire of ECB policy that 1). Hasn't even been at the Zero bound and 2). Actually raised short term rates. LOL. Wait for it.... "Europe's problems are all structural cuz of s0c1aLIsm DEeeeeerrrp!! Go read an economics book idiot!!!"
• BoatShoes

  fish82;1529721 wrote:http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/05/obama-denies-you-can-keep-it-videotaped-promises/
  
  
  
  Impressive. Gotta give Obie credit for at least having the stones to keep doubling down on this.

  One instance where his favorite line "What we've always said was...X thing that he didn't really always say" isn't going to work IMHO.
• BoatShoes

  sleeper;1529695 wrote:But at what cost?

  I'm wrong. I shouldn't say negligible.
  
  1. We have to listen to people say that Social Security will go bankrupt and is a ponzi scheme when this is impossible in our country as Greenspan eloquently pointed out to the Boy Wonder.
  
  2. We have to listen to the fantasies of retired Republicans who tell us how they would be so much richer had they not had social security taxes (we could lower them anyway for what it's worth and we should) when really >90% would have negligible savings. Again, it's a moral question as to whether we might be better off to have them starving because they were irresponsible or whatever you would call it.
  
  I say lower the payroll tax to a negligible level, eliminate the employer contribution and double the avg benefit. : thumbup:
• jmog

  BoatShoes;1529703 wrote:I'm not sure the "roll out" could've possibly been fucked up anymore than it was. It's not looking good for O-care right now. Hopefully we can pass Ron Johnson's bill (cold day in hell). Medicare didn't start off so well either and now generations have benefited from the law in the aggregate and Ronald Reagan was running around telling the country that we'd think back to the days when men were free from socialized medicine. The jury is still out on Obongocare.

  So are you willing to finally admit that no one has wanted it no matter if you call it ACA or Obamacare the numbers still show a 15-17% difference between 'against' and 'for'?
• jmog

  Boat, is the POTUS direct and obvious lie, not even just spin pure lie, that was quoted Monday night denying he said "If you like your health-care plan, you will be able to keep your health-care plan, period"...is there any type of punishment allowed for that?
  
  Should lying to the American people, caught on video, be impeachable?