Phony scaremongering is scary.

The wealthy Republicans?

I bet next time they'll vote for McCain.

Cato. That is all.

Wait, Wait... I thought the unemployed deadbeats of America voted for Obama, just for free handouts. Now you're telling me young people who pay taxes and are already stuck with the debts of the most fiscally irresponsible generation in histoyr (predominantly Republican, mind you), are going to have to pay for something they may actually benefit from? And they voted for Obama? I am shocked and outraged, and wish for a time machine so I could anoint St. Sarah of Wasilla our queen.

/Cato?

...and who pay virtually no federal income tax.

/just sayin

ne2d: ...and who pay virtually no federal income tax.

/just sayin

those "lucky duckies," the poor!

ne2d: ...and who pay virtually no federal income tax.

or, wait - do you mean the super-rich, who hire armies of tax attorneys to ensure that they pay virtually no tax at all?

/used to work for a private swiss bank
//what goes on behind the scenes would make your head swim

Paying more by being allowed to stay under their parents' coverage longer?

This is already happening- health care reform be damned... the youngest are stuck paying for old people who would be dead if they didn't have government health insurance...

Small price to pay.

That's ok.

We're not assholes like the boomers, we're ok paying a little more in taxes so children stop dying of preventable diseases.

You can keep trying to fear monger us about taxes, we understand that a society has to spend money to protect its citizens.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm packing for my trip to NYC this weekend for the commissioning of a Billion dollar warship that we don't need.

see i thought the key here was making sure young people, who tend to need less medical care, all purchased affordable insurance essentially subsidizing the older folks who need more care. the hard part is making it cheap enough for people with little money to afford.

this is exactly the kind of crazy socialist, libtard scheme that the insurance industry already farking uses. except they'll pull the plug on your cancer treatment if they feel like it.

FlashHarry: //what goes on behind the scenes would make your head swim

You could write a tell all book, and make millions!

If so, so what?
I'm cool with that, I'm going to be smug as shiat, but I'm cool with paying more so you whiny old f*cks can get your diabetes shots.

FlashHarry: or, wait - do you mean the super-rich, who hire armies of tax attorneys to ensure that they pay virtually no tax at all?

Well yeah, that's not exactly a secret.

Alacritous: You could write a tell all book, and make millions!

The super-rich don't just have tax-attorneys, they've got other kinds too.

what_now: That's ok.

We're not assholes like the boomers, we're ok paying a little more in taxes so children stop dying of preventable diseases.

You can keep trying to fear monger us about taxes, we understand that a society has to spend money to protect its citizens.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm packing for my trip to NYC this weekend for the commissioning of a Billion dollar warship that we don't need.

That's what she said! And it made sense.

EvilEgg: The super-rich don't just have tax-attorneys, they've got other kinds too.

Once the NDA expires, all bets are off.

Who pays for Medicare now?

Being okay with helping others at personal expense? That's unpossible!

doublesecretprobation: see i thought the key here was making sure young people, who tend to need less medical care, all purchased affordable insurance essentially subsidizing the older folks who need more care. the hard part is making it cheap enough for people with little money to afford.

this is exactly the kind of crazy socialist, libtard scheme that the insurance industry already farking uses. except they'll pull the plug on your cancer treatment if they feel like it.

but but but GOVERNMT.

what_now: Now if you'll excuse me, I'm packing for my trip to NYC this weekend for the commissioning of a Billion dollar warship that we don't need.

NYC Fark party?

Ok. Even if that Fark headline is true, which most of them aren't, ok.

Most young people aren't greedy, bitter, assholes.

Jesus, haven't we had this same thread like 5 times?

The Cato Institute. Surely this organization would not fudge the truth.

i don't mind paying more in taxes to provide health care to Americans.

"Who will pay the most under Obama's health care plan? The same young people who turned out in droves to vote for him. You're welcome"

Um, I'm ok with that. In fact, it would be worth it just to get the boomers to shut up about how great they are.

They'll also have affordable health insurance if they lose a job. So there's that.

A healthy nation is a strong nation. The republic comes first.

That's my position.

Now explain to me why you're against it. Please.

Before I got bored I got as far as the part in the executive summary where he was talking about how it'd be difficult to tell if the subsidies for low income workers would offset the increase in premiums for young people. Did he ever prove that it would or would not?

Witnessing a week on the Fark Politics tab is like watching Groundhog Day fifteen thousand times in a row. Do we ever move past repeating these tired old arguments ad nauseam?

2 parties.

One has done nothing to reform health care in the past while in power, and in fact prevented the other side from reforming it.

The other has shown an interest in reform, even if its not perfect.

As a young person who pays taxes, would I want the party who wants to keep the system that does too little for too much and whose costs increase faster than other first world countries?

OR would I want the party who is going to increase coverage while decreasing cost?


What's next, you'll enlighten me by telling me that I'm shooting myself in the food by voting in democrats who will spend money, and that I should vote for republican tax cuts because of their smashing success at balancing budgets?

Milkbeer: Useful idiots...

Why target the experienced taxpayers, when you can target naive useful idiots...? Its the democrat way, thanks douchebags.... here's Obamba/Mugabe t-shirt... if you want more, they're next to the Che's....

Naive useful idiots? The dems are selling to the gop base now?

make me some tea: what_now: Now if you'll excuse me, I'm packing for my trip to NYC this weekend for the commissioning of a Billion dollar warship that we don't need.

NYC Fark party?

I'm not actually going, The Boy is. I was making a point.

Right wing elitist version of "naner naner"

Shut up CATO, you cock.

Boy, I wasn't sure what to think until this here Right Wing Rugged Individualist think tank showed me the truth. They are TOTALLY believable.

Tsunami Ditka: Witnessing a week on the Fark Politics tab is like watching Groundhog Day fifteen thousand times in a row. Do we ever move past repeating these tired old arguments ad nauseam?

No. Now be quiet, I'm about to blame this on Obama.

Mr_Fabulous: A healthy nation is a strong nation. The republic comes first.

That's my position.

Now explain to me why you're against it. Please.

But we'd get get a healthier nation if those who can pick themselves up from their bootstraps do, and those who can't die off. Heck, that could even cut unemployment.

We watched the Military Industrial Complex spend billions over the last eight years in some Messopotamian shiathole and thought "Man, what could happen if we decided to use some of that money to actually help people in our own country instead of bombing brown people halfway across the world.

And since the young are mostly for health care reform, there shouldn't be any complaining then... right?

/yeah, right.

Mr_Fabulous: A healthy nation is a strong nation. The republic comes first.

That's my position.

Now explain to me why you're against it. Please.

The republic only comes first when there's a Republican Congress and a Republican President. If Democrats are in charge, it's a despotic institution which deserves our comparisons to Hitler and our threatening signage ("We came unarmed...THIS time").

Does that make sense now, you freedom-hating commie pinko schosialist Obama-worshiping libtard? Why do you hate freedom?? Why? WHY?? Where is the birth certificate??

Sounds an awful lot like So-so Security. We know how well that has worked out.

FEAR!!!!

mynameismark: Most young people aren't greedy, bitter, assholes.

I'm actually a generous bitter asshole. I'm the guy who throws in an extra $20 at the end of dinner just so I don't have to hear you biatch over who owes a dollar more. And I tip big because it's easier to calculate 20% than try to figure out 17.375%, then do some rounding bullshiat, and argue over that for another 15 minutes.

Tsunami Ditka: Witnessing a week on the Fark Politics tab is like watching Groundhog Day fifteen thousand times in a row. Do we ever move past repeating these tired old arguments ad nauseam?

Nope.

The guardians of intelligent and witty discourse on fark ensure that we never make it past that point.

You'll know them when you see them.

But they can afford it, with their cushy green-sector jobs and lack of massive student loan debt because of Obama's expansion of federal grant programs to give every last one of them a free education!

Wait, that didn't happen? Damn, that sucks...

/As ye sow...
//28, gay, minority - didn't vote for Obama (Didn't vote McCain either)
///According to identity politics, I was supposed to vote Obama though

"They'll also have affordable health insurance if they lose a job. So there's that."

How affordable is insurance when you're out of a job? I would assume, like all welfare programs, they will use your previous years income to determine eligibility for the "public option". If you made too much last year (even if you have no income now), no soup for you!

/Happened to me many times when I applied for unemployment, food stamps, and student aid - "You made too much last year!" "But I'm broke/unemployed NOW" "Oh well, sorry, but come back and apply again next year and you should be approved then."

Smackledorfer: 2 parties.

One has done nothing to reform health care in the past while in power, and in fact prevented the other side from reforming it.

The other has shown an interest in reform, even if its not perfect.

As a young person who pays taxes, would I want the party who wants to keep the system that does too little for too much and whose costs increase faster than other first world countries?

OR would I want the party who is going to increase coverage while decreasing cost?


What's next, you'll enlighten me by telling me that I'm shooting myself in the food by voting in democrats who will spend money, and that I should vote for republican tax cuts because of their smashing success at balancing budgets?

No, vote "None of the Above," they both suck.

That's why we voted for him. We're not quite as big selfish assholes as the kind of person who submitted this.

I, for one, am ok with paying more if it means that everyone gets coverage.