Trump vs. Hillary (NO OTHER OPTIONS)

• like_that

  

  BoatShoes;1814394 wrote:The point of Obamacare was to guarantee coverage to people with pre-existing conditions within a system of private health insurance. .

  Oh ok, that's why I was called the affordable care act... [emoji849]
• like_that

  

  sleeper;1814408 wrote:Obamacare is a disaster overall but it was a good start. Hopefully we can move towards a better system when our first female President is elected.

  Lol, ok isadore.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  O-Trap;1814149 wrote: I think so. I read some excerpts about the Civil War that I believe are attributed to her, but I'm not sure. It's been awhile. What was the point she's made that is compelling within this discussion, if you wouldn't mind?

  The books that I've read deal with predominately the antebellum era. However, she uses tons of footnotes, references and the like that deal with the founding laws, why some of them are culturally and regional important, etc. The main book I would recommend by her would be "The Plantation Mistress" as it specifically deals with how laws were interpreted and organized for specific uses. To note: many of those footnotes and references compels a reader to dig even further.
  But enough of that, as it's really not the topic. We can take all that to PMs but it might be easier to just grab a copy. I'm too lazy (and busy) to read through the book right now to pick out all of the notes.
• like_that

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1814310 wrote:The only thing I'm hoping from this tape is conservatives can finally stop pretending they give a fuck about morals and integrity. You fake fuckers.

  I agree with this. Very fucking annoying. The sooner they realize they are not the angel they pretend to be, the sooner the GOP can actually shift their social stances without worrying about losing votes. Huge problem with the right imo.
  
  It's just like democrats still pretend they care about minorities. Neither side wants to look at the mirror and admit their flaws.
• queencitybuckeye

  like_that;1814425 wrote:
  It's just like democrats still pretend they care about minorities. Neither side wants to look at the mirror and admit their flaws.

  They do care. The Dems want minorities to continue to be beholden to them, promising the world while doing nothing to actually help them. Rinse and repeat.
• like_that

  

  queencitybuckeye;1814426 wrote:They do care. The Dems want minorities to continue to be beholden to them, promising the world while doing nothing to actually help them. Rinse and repeat.

  Lol, yes good point.
• BoatShoes

  like_that;1814420 wrote:Oh ok, that's why I was called the affordable care act... [emoji849]

  
  Lol at you thinking the popular name has anything to do with anything beyond propaganda but in any case within the system as any, there are winners and losers. a 63 year old woman with no income gets cheap and heavily subsidized plans through the exchange. a young employee at a job that doesn't have employer health insurance pays more than he would in a free market without guaranteed issue because Obamacare makes him get private insurance and more than when he paid for nothing because he didn't need to go to the doctor, etc. or didn't pay hospital emergency bills like before.
• BoatShoes

  like_that;1814425 wrote:I agree with this. Very fucking annoying. The sooner they realize they are not the angel they pretend to be, the sooner the GOP can actually shift their social stances without worrying about losing votes. Huge problem with the right imo.
  
  It's just like democrats still pretend they care about minorities. Neither side wants to look at the mirror and admit their flaws.

  Minorities are democrats.
• like_that

  

  BoatShoes;1814428 wrote:Lol at you thinking the popular name has anything to do with anything beyond propaganda but in any case within the system as any, there are winners and losers. a 63 year old woman with no income gets cheap and heavily subsidized plans through the exchange. a young employee at a job that doesn't have employer health insurance pays more than he would in a free market without guaranteed issue because Obamacare makes him get private insurance and more than when he paid for nothing because he didn't need to go to the doctor, etc. or didn't pay hospital emergency bills like before.

  LOL at you trying to use an emotional story to try and prove a point. The point of Obamacare was to provide affordable health care for all, period. It was shoved down our throats with lies. Just man up and admit it. It's ok to criticize your boy obama. I realize a big portion of his legacy is hanging onto Obamacare. That's why some delusional politicians still try to pump Obamacare up by saying it is affordable. Keep trying to move those goal posts though, you know damn well the purpose of Obamacare and it's failing. Let's hear your next emotional story though. That will prove your point!
• BoatShoes

  like_that;1814432 wrote:LOL at you trying to use an emotional story to try and prove a point. The point of Obamacare was to provide affordable health care for all, period. It was shoved down our throats with lies. Just man up and admit it. It's ok to criticize your boy obama. I realize a big portion of his legacy is hanging onto Obamacare. That's why some delusional politicians still try to pump Obamacare up by saying it is affordable. Keep trying to move those goal posts though, you know damn well the purpose of Obamacare and it's failing. Let's hear your next emotional story though. That will prove your point!

  Sigh. Go educate yourself on the run up to the bill passage. The primary obstacle to getting universal health coverage in a private health insurance market is adverse selection...they would deny unhealthy people and chase healthy people while healthy people didn't want to buy insurance and unhealthy people without insurance really wanted it and could not get it if they did not have an employer that provided health insurance coverage. Hence, the three legged stool.
  
  There are no moved goalposts. One of the major criticisms from the start is that there was not enough emphasis on cost control and increasing supply to accommodate increased demand. Of course, that was part of how they got the major stakeholders and insurance companies on board.
  
  Never mind of course that 20 million people have affordable health coverage now when they didn't before - most especially millions of minorities that you claim democrats have done nothing for.
  
  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/18/health/immigrants-the-poor-and-minorities-gain-sharply-under-health-act.html
  
  And of course it is not as if you would even support a medicare-for-all plan that made healthcare even affordable anyway!
• BoatShoes

  queencitybuckeye;1814426 wrote:They do care. The Dems want minorities to continue to be beholden to them, promising the world while doing nothing to actually help them. Rinse and repeat.

  Gains for blacks were muted because they disproportionately live in states that chose not to expand Medicaid. About 60 percent of poor blacks live in states that did not expand Medicaid. While the share of poor blacks covered by Medicaid did rise by two percentage points in those states, the rate rose by six points in states that expanded the program.
  
  In all, minorities gained more than whites, making up two-thirds of the increase in insured adults across the country, and 70 percent of the increase in private insurance. Minority men who work as groundskeepers and janitors saw substantial gains, rising to 59 percent insured, up from 51 percent in 2013. Hispanic male construction workers rose to 43 percent insured, from 36 percent in 2013.

  Too bad all those poor minorities who live in southern red states who didn't expand medicaid don't properly blame the Obama...
• CenterBHSFan

  

  So... the only people who are against Obamacare are the people who have not educated themselves on it every step of the way?
  
  You make me giggle.
• friendfromlowry

  Belly35;1814392 wrote:Until you get to the age of Trump 11 years age, rich, powerful, entrepeneur, intreging personality and engaged in the political, entertainment world, bussiness and world leader social circle .... Stfu. You don't know your destiny nor do you know what behavior tendencies your have.

  I can say 100% fact I won't be walking around days or decades from now doing or bragging about whatever I want to women because of my status. Your absolute defense of him is...pitiful, really.
• BoatShoes

  sleeper;1814410 wrote:I don't think it raised the cost for the rest of us; its just the cost is now reflected in your insurance quote instead of your marked up hospital bill.
  
  Well arguably at least, hospitals have no incentive to give a fair market price for their services. This is one of the reasons I think we need government to run healthcare; too many market failures to build an effective system.

  Well many people were free loaders who had no cost as they didn't go to the doctor and were not insured even for a catastrophe so they paid nothing. For former freeloaders who now have to get health insurance through an exchange and don't have a low income that would qualify for subsidies, they are going to have a noticeably higher expense.
  
  Moreover, the addition of the formerly uninsured healthy people to the risk pools through the mandate, etc. has had less of an effect on holding down costs for insurance companies now covering the sick folks than hoped for but maybe that will change in a couple of years as the mandate has more of an effect and more healthy people are in the pools longer.
• BoatShoes

  CenterBHSFan;1814439 wrote:So... the only people who are against Obamacare are the people who have not educated themselves on it every step of the way?
  
  You make me giggle.

  I didn't say that at all. Try again. I suggested that Like_That educate himself on the policy reasons behind Obummercare and not just the popular name. He is fine to oppose it. Plenty of people know that the chief problem was pre-existing condition denial and would rather scrap obamacare and altogether and try a different approach.
  
  My point is...that it was too simplistic of Like_That to say "the point of the law was affordable health care for all." If that was they point they would've just passed medicare for all. But no, they had to do something within the context of our current hodge podge health care system where millions are happy with their health coverage through their employers, unions have negotiated better health care plans than a universal medicare for all program could ever be, large health insurance companies are huge employers and lobbies, etc. and they would've opposed it, big pharma and the AMA would have been opposed to a Medicare for All program negotiating hard on prices, etc.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  I view this latest imbroglio from Trump to be in the same categories as Hillary's. They are both first tier trash. Regardless of who becomes President, my vote won't be going in direct support of either of them.
• like_that

  

  BoatShoes;1814436 wrote:Sigh. Go educate yourself on the run up to the bill passage. The primary obstacle to getting universal health coverage in a private health insurance market is adverse selection...they would deny unhealthy people and chase healthy people while healthy people didn't want to buy insurance and unhealthy people without insurance really wanted it and could not get it if they did not have an employer that provided health insurance coverage. Hence, the three legged stool.
  
  There are no moved goalposts. One of the major criticisms from the start is that there was not enough emphasis on cost control and increasing supply to accommodate increased demand. Of course, that was part of how they got the major stakeholders and insurance companies on board.
  
  Never mind of course that 20 million people have affordable health coverage now when they didn't before - most especially millions of minorities that you claim democrats have done nothing for.
  
  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/18/health/immigrants-the-poor-and-minorities-gain-sharply-under-health-act.html
  
  And of course it is not as if you would even support a medicare-for-all plan that made healthcare even affordable anyway!

  There it is, now you're using the smug approach to pretend to prove a point.If I had the time I would go back and revive your posts regarding Obamacare before it passed. Completely different tune than your current posts. Congrats on remaining to be an Obama fanboy.
  
  Literally anyone who supported Obamacare said it would be affordable healthcare for all. Now you and the supporters are trying to tell us that it was destined to be a failure from the beginning (which btw is exactly what everyone said who opposed it) and you all were so smart that you knew this, but still voted for it because you knew the end goal was single payer after years of failed Obamacare? That is text book moving the goal posts. Only dumb ass partisan sheep eat that up.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  BoatShoes;1814443 wrote:I didn't say that at all. Try again. I suggested that Like_That educate himself on the policy reasons behind Obummercare and not just the popular name. He is fine to oppose it. Plenty of people know that the chief problem was pre-existing condition denial and would rather scrap obamacare and altogether and try a different approach.
  
  My point is...that it was too simplistic of Like_That to say "the point of the law was affordable health care for all." If that was they point they would've just passed medicare for all. But no, they had to do something within the context of our current hodge podge health care system where millions are happy with their health coverage through their employers, unions have negotiated better health care plans than a universal medicare for all program could ever be, large health insurance companies are huge employers and lobbies, etc. and they would've opposed it, big pharma and the AMA would have been opposed to a Medicare for All program negotiating hard on prices, etc.

  Here is THE reasoning behind Obamacare:
  
  [video=youtube;926bPZiQhgY][/video]
• like_that

  

  • Remarks on the Affordable Care Act Supreme Court ruling, June 28, 2012: "If you’re one of the more than 250 million Americans who already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance — this law will only make it more secure and more affordable."
  
  [INDENT]Under the health care law, "everybody will have lower rates, better quality care and better access."
  — Nancy Pelosi on Sunday, July 1st, 2012 in on 'Meet the Press'
  
  
  [h=1]Pelosi on Obamacare: 'I Don't Remember Saying that Everybody in the Country Would Have a Lower Premium'[/h][/INDENT]
  Move those goalposts!
• Heretic

  

  CenterBHSFan;1814447 wrote:I view this latest imbroglio from Trump to be in the same categories as Hillary's. They are both first tier trash. Regardless of who becomes President, my vote won't be going in direct support of either of them.

  Yep. The only real effect it had on me is being able to watch the hilarity of watching this site's more derpy R supporters trying to find ways to defend him. After reading Belly's last couple posts, I'm half-convinced dude might have had a stroke while typing.
• BoatShoes

  like_that;1814448 wrote:There it is, now you're using the smug approach to pretend to prove a point.If I had the time I would go back and revive your posts regarding Obamacare before it passed. Completely different tune than your current posts. Congrats on remaining to be an Obama fanboy.
  
  Literally anyone who supported Obamacare said it would be affordable healthcare for all. Now you and the supporters are trying to tell us that it was destined to be a failure from the beginning (which btw is exactly what everyone said who opposed it) and you all were so smart that you knew this, but still voted for it because you knew the end goal was single payer after years of failed Obamacare? That is text book moving the goal posts. Only dumb ass partisan sheep eat that up.

  Sorry pal. You won't find any fanboy posts from the pre-obamacare era saying it was the greatest thing ever so don't waste your time. Moreover, I actually don't think Obamacare is destined to fail and I think it is a net success. I believe Medicare for All makes more sense but I don't think it will ever happen and personally I don't think it is the right approach because millions of conservatives are against and I think they deserve to be able to get coverage from a less efficient private health insurance company if they desire. And, a lot of people with unions would end up with net worse coverage probably. A nice middle ground to me would be to allow people to buy into medicare if they want.
  
  So try to follow along. I think Obamacare is a net good but not the greatest, it isn't destined to fail and won't fail but could be improved and I don't want single payer nor do I think it is coming anytime soon. Hope that helps.
• like_that

  

  BoatShoes;1814460 wrote:Sorry pal. You won't find any fanboy posts from the pre-obamacare era saying it was the greatest thing ever so don't waste your time. Moreover, I actually don't think Obamacare is destined to fail and I think it is a net success. I believe Medicare for All makes more sense but I don't think it will ever happen and personally I don't think it is the right approach because millions of conservatives are against and I think they deserve to be able to get coverage from a less efficient private health insurance company if they desire. And, a lot of people with unions would end up with net worse coverage probably. A nice middle ground to me would be to allow people to buy into medicare if they want.
  
  So try to follow along. I think Obamacare is a net good but not the greatest, it isn't destined to fail and won't fail but could be improved and I don't want single payer nor do I think it is coming anytime soon. Hope that helps.

  Whatever you say fanboy. It must suck to constantly spin your own bullshit.
• BoatShoes

  like_that;1814453 wrote:• Remarks on the Affordable Care Act Supreme Court ruling, June 28, 2012: "If you’re one of the more than 250 million Americans who already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance — this law will only make it more secure and more affordable."
  
  [INDENT]Under the health care law, "everybody will have lower rates, better quality care and better access."
  — Nancy Pelosi on Sunday, July 1st, 2012 in on 'Meet the Press'
  
  
  Pelosi on Obamacare: 'I Don't Remember Saying that Everybody in the Country Would Have a Lower Premium'
  
  [/INDENT]
  
  Move those goalposts!

  Nancy Pelosi was wrong, lying or worse lol. Like I said, stop paying attention to the name of the bill, what politicians say in political propaganda, etc.
• BoatShoes

  like_that;1814461 wrote:Whatever you say fanboy. It must suck to constantly spin your own bullshit.

  Lol. OC still bringing quality laughs IMHO. : thumbup:
• BoatShoes

  CenterBHSFan;1814449 wrote:Here is THE reasoning behind Obamacare:
  
  [video=youtube;926bPZiQhgY][/video]

  Lol Single-Payer is never coming to America. Enjoy thinking Obama pandering to the AFL-CIO in 2003 is informative!