There's no such thing as "affordable healthcare" anymore, genius.
Trumpcare
- Thread starter patrick jane
- Start date
Lon
Well-known member
I 'think' they are just against double-dipping for it. My brother is a fireman. As soon as Obamacare took over, the poor were making $100k phone calls to 911. When asked to stop (not real emergencies, also part of their own problems with abuse etc.), they quipped "Obama said I could." We all are against doing something that can be abused.
Yes, it can be. I'm not against all democratic agendas. The 'bleeding' part of the bleeding heart liberal, I'm not even against, but is it really bleeding when liberals are a smaller group? Aren't they really allocating the rest of our dollars? After that, I will give beyond my taxes, but I'd rather see programs that aren't as easy to abuse. Conservatives actually do put up when it comes to giving to genuine needs, so it has to be an objection somewhere on the taxes side of things. Communism/socialism is more a liberal and democratic agenda. We aren't heartless, just want some equity in responsibility as well, so smaller government etc. where somebody has to at 'least' try a bit on their own.
The Canadian healthcare system costs far less as a percentage of GNP than the US - with far better heath outcomes!
Maybe there is and you just don't understand it.
Unless you are real sick
I wish that were so, but I don't believe it. The responses aren't really ACA centered. They're about objecting to anything that doesn't meet their charity litmus, which I think is an onion thin excuse that has a way of reducing to...did you ever see Sense and Sensibility? There's a man who inherits a great estate and his father has told him to provide for the dying man's wife (English law forbade direct inheritance of the land except to a male heir). The heir and his wife consider what charity is best and eventually arrive at a figure far removed from the dying man's wish.
I see a lot of that in the faux hand-wringing by people who mean to give the impression they'd do plenty but begrudge the hand of the government taking their limelight. Because if they're telling the truth (and I think they mostly aren't) then that's the difference. They can't be seen or see themselves as a generous soul if they aren't asked pretty please...
lain: Otherwise, you can't be robbed if the money you're asked to give to help someone is money you'd give were you asked, to rephrase my earlier.Sure. And I'm absolutely for wading in and making this thing better, which Republicans should have done to begin with instead of playing politics with it.
If someone asks you for your cloak? The government just did.
There's a tax exception for liberals?
I don't doubt it. Sadly, I do doubt it for many. Their conduct toward the less fortunate screams to it.
Such as? (either, both preferably)
Back in 2015 The Chronicle of Philanthropy noted that the wealthy in this country continue to give less on average and the poor give more. The South is remarkably philanthropic, comparatively. It's largely a religious, not conservative thing. The top states, Alabama among the top three, in therms of charitable giving are also the top states in terms of religious devotion.
Two more Republican Senators are out, that's all she wrote for healthcare. Soak up Obamacare and skyrocketing premiums, not to mention deductibles.
jeffblue101
New member
Yeah I agree. Mike Lee made a mistake, now Republicans are pursuing a 2015 repeal bill language that was never clean repeal and left all of obamacare regulations intact.
jeffblue101
New member
Sad part about all of this is that Trumpcare was a bigger repeal bill than any other Repeal passed by rebulicans while Obama was in office. Many republicans who wanted a clean repeal are going to be let down when they start to read the old repeal bill.
Lon
Well-known member
Similar to true life. One group of my stepbrothers received about 3 million each. Myother had co-signed, prior to their inheritance for a brand new mustang at a hefty amount. When the brother burned up the engine, he stuck my brother as the co-signer. When inheritance came around, a decent thought would have paid that back. :nono: Liberals all. One of them, I believe is a Christian by his devotion but the other two are not. They followed their liberal mother (both politics and theology). Conservative Christians, at least, out-give our secular counterparts. I think you are correct that conservative aren't enablers, however. We give, but you are correct it isn't a blanket of sentiment that extends to all without ... "discernment" or discretion, or whatever might be a fitting qualifier here.I wish that were so, but I don't believe it. The responses aren't really ACA centered. They're about objecting to anything that doesn't meet their charity litmus, which I think is an onion thin excuse that has a way of reducing to...did you ever see Sense and Sensibility? There's a man who inherits a great estate and his father has told him to provide for the dying man's wife (English law forbade direct inheritance of the land except to a male heir). The heir and his wife consider what charity is best and eventually arrive at a figure far removed from the dying man's wish.
I see a lot of that in the faux hand-wringing by people who mean to give the impression they'd do plenty but begrudge the hand of the government taking their limelight. Because if they're telling the truth (and I think they mostly aren't) then that's the difference. They can't be seen or see themselves as a generous soul if they aren't asked pretty please...
To me? It seems like we really don't know how. A few representatives might consider traveling to Canada or somewhere else they are trying to make it work. :idunno: I will give Obama, at least, points for attempt any way. I just think this all needed to be studied out. Premiums indeed went high. I think we need to regulate insurance companies better and with more regulations. Does that make me a moderate by some scales? :think:
The 'government' isn't a someone though. What if I run out of cloaks? I think I'm a bleeding heart conservative, actually. I would and do give the coats off my back. Flaw or for good.
Groups tend to spend according to their own agenda. We are fairly partisan in our selfishness, across board, politically.
Not when both Gallup, Barna and Pew confirm we out-give exponentially, even with heavy-or-light taxes (some conflation of conservative Christians/conservative politics here, I realize they shouldn't always be, the percentages are high for it, though).
Allocation: You get so many dollars per year. If you go over it, you can apply for more. Case workers that are better trained, etc. It makes for bigger government though. I'd like to see more voluntary 'jury' type councils though, by draw. Just breeding 'some' responsibility would be a good thing. I realize it is then providing with strings attached, but I think those good strings and meant to be productive. It is one of those 'qualification' you were talking about that we conservatives have. I think you correct, but I think it at least potentially, is meant for good.
This is an interesting article (are religious always politically conservative). As I said, it isn't always correct to conflate religious conservativism with political conservativism, and lately it is more difficult when we don't feel Republican politicians are carrying our conservative values (religious and political, covered in the article as well). However, when it comes to voting, it is true, and explains this last election: a good number of us didn't want Trump, McCain, or Romney. None of them represent us well. In my state, if you are going to vote Republican, you cannot vote for the Democrat nominee (you have to vote your party only). It serves democrats, and WA is a democrat state, so that law, is meant to keep democrats of choice in office, I'd think (seems a political power-play to me). I don't complain much because I'm not really interested in who gets into office that I didn't vote for anyway. More directly, I think we'd have had Ted Cruz, if other states worked the same way OR I'm not as familiar with my fellow Republicans. The writers of the article note that the language (emphasis) of a particular party is 'why' Christians are generally Conservative. It also cites harm Republicans have done to groups, as that which makes them liberal or democrat politically (minorities who see damage from republicans, generally are moderate or liberal etc.). Your top states would, by the numbers, be both conservative politically as well as dedicated theologically-spiritually.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Actually, there is
Eat right, get plenty of rest and exercise and plan to die of natural causes in your seventies
And it's free
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Or are prepared to wait a few years for "elective" surgeries like hip or knee replacement
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
In the first place, would you be willing to spend your evenings reading stories to your son?
Of course
By your logic then, you shouldn't raise a fuss if the governnment forces you to spend your evenings reading stories to your neighbor's children
Republicans controlling the White House, the Senate and the House, this is their chance to finally reverse the New Deal and the Great Society. This is their chance to shrink government and drown it in the bathtub. They aren’t going to mess it up now by being soft.
Republicans’ repeal-and-replace plan failed because it wasn’t harsh enough. It didn’t cut Medicaid deep enough. It left too big of a role for government in health care.
Many Republican leaders, including Vice President Mike Pence, House Speaker Paul Ryan, Budget Director Mick Mulvaney, Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, dozens of senators and hundreds of House members believe the government has no role whatsoever in helping people who can’t help themselves.
Dismantling the nanny state is the whole point.
Republicans’ repeal-and-replace plan failed because it wasn’t harsh enough. It didn’t cut Medicaid deep enough. It left too big of a role for government in health care.
Many Republican leaders, including Vice President Mike Pence, House Speaker Paul Ryan, Budget Director Mick Mulvaney, Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, dozens of senators and hundreds of House members believe the government has no role whatsoever in helping people who can’t help themselves.
Dismantling the nanny state is the whole point.
DavidK
New member
Interesting report on the radio this morning about medication expiration dates.
Pharmaceutical companies have no reason to test whether their medications remain potent past one to two years, so they don't, and label them as such.
Hospital pharmacies alone throw out millions of dollars in medication a year.
A pharmacist found some medications in a closet that dated several decades back and out of curiousity took them to a lab to have them analyzed. Twelve of fourteen compounds in the meds were found to be full potency.
The government stockpiles large amounts of medications in case of national emergency. They periodically test them and have found they last far longer than the expiration dates. When they do find that, the FDA adjusts the expirations, but there is no comprehensive system to really find out how long medications are potent.
A lot of healthcare money is simply destroyed every year because of this.
Pharmaceutical companies have no reason to test whether their medications remain potent past one to two years, so they don't, and label them as such.
Hospital pharmacies alone throw out millions of dollars in medication a year.
A pharmacist found some medications in a closet that dated several decades back and out of curiousity took them to a lab to have them analyzed. Twelve of fourteen compounds in the meds were found to be full potency.
The government stockpiles large amounts of medications in case of national emergency. They periodically test them and have found they last far longer than the expiration dates. When they do find that, the FDA adjusts the expirations, but there is no comprehensive system to really find out how long medications are potent.
A lot of healthcare money is simply destroyed every year because of this.
Right, and when you are off reading to your neighbor's kids, the government will come and take away your guns.
Same logic at work.