If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(US Supreme Court) NewsFlash Supreme Court rules that Obamacare is constitutional. The bland mask that is Mitt Romney's face twitches with something called "emotion"   (supremecourt.gov) divider line 3382
    More: NewsFlash, obamacare, supreme courts, Mitt Romney, supreme court ruling  
•       •       •

14920 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Jun 2012 at 10:27 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

3382 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | » | Last
 
2012-06-28 03:40:11 PM  

netweavr: qorkfiend: netweavr: People without children should (and do) pay higher taxes...

I won't debate that people without children do pay higher taxes, but what argument do you have as to why they should pay higher taxes?

National Security requires continuous replenishment of a nations population.


Bah, that's what Obama's secret fleet of attack drones is for.
 
2012-06-28 03:40:13 PM  

Phinn: StoneColdAtheist: Then Uncle Sugar posted me to Mogadishu for 25 months. Believe me, there is nothing like living in a libertarian paradise to cure one of that disease.

Witnessing the effects of Somalia's 25 years of socialism should be enough to cure anyone of a delusional faith in socialism.


And Sweden's...

Goddamn you are ridiculously hyperbolic.
 
2012-06-28 03:40:30 PM  

The_Sponge: I've seen a lot of stubbornness and ignorance from the other side, but yet I didn't feel the need to act childish.


Then grow up.

Obama said he wouldn't raise our taxes. And he implemented a (Republican) insurance mandate. Which was not a tax.

And then years later, the Supreme Court is now saying, "well, what ya got there is something that could conceivably be classified as a tax, and since it's a tax, then it's okay." Which was a way for the Supreme Court to puss out and leave the law as-is, because rejecting the law would have meant that millions of insured people would be insta-screwed, instead of some people that had enough money but refused to pay for insurance in the year 2014.

And now you're complaining that Obama lied to us, because the Supreme Court re-classified an insurance mandate as a tax. Like Obama had planned this the whole time and he was trying to pull a fast one on us.

I understand you were looking forward to a whole week's worth of gloating, and the Supreme Court just ruined all those plans for you, but seriously...just grow up.
 
2012-06-28 03:40:32 PM  

FrailChild: Lord Dimwit: The Republican Party doesn't want freedom of reproductive choice, freedom of religious choice, or freedom of marriage. If you vote for a Republican, you are implicitly saying that money-related "freedom" is more important than your freedom to do as you please with your own body or in your own bedroom.

Is this what it's really come down to? A Brave New World standoff between people who would trade all their economic freedom to kill their babies and sodomize their boyfriends have control over their own bodies, hearts, and minds and people who want the freedom to spend the money they've earned & run their business the way they choose?


FTFY
 
2012-06-28 03:40:37 PM  

Lord Dimwit: You want to have sex with a llama? Well, the llama can't consent so, no dice.


What if I want to kill a cow and eat it? Does it have to consent?
 
2012-06-28 03:41:15 PM  

Phinn: StoneColdAtheist: Then Uncle Sugar posted me to Mogadishu for 25 months. Believe me, there is nothing like living in a libertarian paradise to cure one of that disease.

Witnessing the effects of Somalia's 25 years of socialism should be enough to cure anyone of a delusional faith in socialism.



You are legally retarded, aren't you?
 
2012-06-28 03:41:27 PM  

canyoneer: If you object to any of this, there is a law on the books (which no one has "standing" to challenge) which allows the state to declare you a "terrorist" based on secret evidence that you are not allowed to see, and based on this to subject you to indefinite detention and/or extra-judicial execution.


intelligent comment below:
Might as well just turn yourself in to your local FEMA camp.


theparanoidgamer.com

I hear there's one conveniently located in Detroit.
 
2012-06-28 03:41:34 PM  

muck4doo: STOP! Just stop. Let them try it out. Who knows? Maybe it will work out for the best. Stop being angry about it though. We lost. The deal is done.


Denial and Isolation
Anger
Bargaining
Depression
Acceptance


you just ripped right thru those sumbiatches right before our very eyes. kudos, i think.
 
2012-06-28 03:41:50 PM  
God damn all you poor people for causing this.

America is ruined now. RUINED!
 
2012-06-28 03:41:50 PM  

The_Sponge: And how sad is it that your side had a victory today, and instead of being happy, you get pissy when somebody points out that *GASP* Obama broke a promise.

t3.gstatic.com
 
2012-06-28 03:41:57 PM  

Corvus: A) They will compete more. There are going to be market places where people will be able to compare apples to apples plans. (well some state Republicans are refusing to set these up for their states currently).

B) they are capped at 80% must be spent on actual healthcare.


that's great but it does NOTHING for Increased COSTS the insurances will have (which will be passed on to us in the form of premiums increases)
and giving the rate board decisions of this 10% thing, i gonna take a stab at it and say the premiums will increase by...wait for it.......10%! (possibly per year)

Do you see the problem I have with this setup?
To solve this problem we need A LOT more health care workers/ Free clinics providing Basic Universal Healthcare.
/let's cut the military in half to pay for it
 
2012-06-28 03:42:13 PM  

OMGH4X: [sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net image 504x381]


Excellent.
 
2012-06-28 03:42:24 PM  

The_Sponge: And how sad is it that your side had a victory today, and instead of being happy, you get pissy when somebody points out rejects today's ruling, but selectively accepts a small piece of it so he can say that *GASP* Obama broke a promise.


If the ruling is wrong, then Obama didn't break a promise.

And if you're annoyed at other people not thinking he lied when you don't think he did...then I really can't help you. But in a couple of years, your preexisting cognitive dissonance will be covered and you can see a shrink.
 
2012-06-28 03:42:34 PM  
YOU GUYS ARE RUINING THIS BEAUTIFUL DAY WITH ALL THIS ARGUING!
 
2012-06-28 03:43:02 PM  

The_Sponge: With the way my state (WA) votes, it doesn't really matter.

/But Glenn thinks that my state and 47 others will go for Romney.
//the odds are better that I will be abducted by aliens this weekend.



Rush had a good point today, would like to hear thoughts by Republicans:

Was Scalia's Dissent Originally a Majority Opinion?
 
2012-06-28 03:43:14 PM  

jshine: Lord Dimwit: You want to have sex with a llama? Well, the llama can't consent so, no dice.

What if I want to kill a cow and eat it? Does it have to consent?


You're asking a vegetarian, so...yes. :)

Seriously, though - the sex with a llama thing was only in there because of the example provided in the earlier post. Eating animals, fark animals...whatever works. Just don't eat or fark my animals.
 
2012-06-28 03:43:27 PM  

mr lawson: Corvus: A) They will compete more. There are going to be market places where people will be able to compare apples to apples plans. (well some state Republicans are refusing to set these up for their states currently).

B) they are capped at 80% must be spent on actual healthcare.

that's great but it does NOTHING for Increased COSTS the insurances will have (which will be passed on to us in the form of premiums increases)
and giving the rate board decisions of this 10% thing, i gonna take a stab at it and say the premiums will increase by...wait for it.......10%! (possibly per year)

Do you see the problem I have with this setup?
To solve this problem we need A LOT more health care workers/ Free clinics providing Basic Universal Healthcare.
/let's cut the military in half to pay for it


What increased costs do they have?
 
2012-06-28 03:43:32 PM  

The_Sponge: Lando Lincoln: The_Sponge: Rwa2play: I like how you and your brethren keep trying to push this as a talking point when, in fact, it's not.

But do keep farking that chicken.

You guys can't even admit that he broke that promise. At least keep it real by admitting that he did, but you don't mind because you like the end result.

If I promise my wife I'm not going to buy a blue car and I come home with a red car, and two years later my kid dumps a can of blue paint on the car and my wife screams, "BUT YOU PROMISED ME THAT YOU WOULD NOT BUY A BLUE CAR!" would I be allowed to punch her in the face like you deserve to be?

That is one awful analogy.

/So wonderful that some people in this thread are reduced to insults and childish behavior.
//Apparently disagreeing with Obama and pointing out a broken promise warrant a punch in the face.


Sponge, I'm mostly a lurker here. I'm also a registered Republican that favors fairly liberal social policies along with actually conservative economical policies (the kind we haven't seen since Dole). I'm not hugely happy with ACA as it currently stands, but this talking point is ridiculous in three ways and doesn't really help getting a republican in office in November as it's basically lying, and Romney has done so much of that he really has gimped himself in the future debates because of it.

First, the ACA is not Obama's plan. It was modified substantially by congress, including things brought in by our own side. To call it such is factually incorrect, and long term will only make Republicans seem venomous to the country as individually most of the parts of ACA that are really well liked are part of Obama's plan, and most of the parts people don't like, like the Mandate, actually were added by Republicans in congress.

Sticking to this will give Romeny a lot of vulnerabilities in the debates, at with this verdict the debates will be his primary way to get elected as he will be playing much more defensively now.

Second, this talking point is incorrect in that assuming that the ACA that was passed was Obama's version, it was not Obama that made it into a tax. The Supreme Court did. In that the car analogy is correct, as the original drafting of congress's ACA was not a tax until this afternoon. Similarly, this will be a vulnerability to exploit in the debates.

Third, this is the exact same system that Romney enacted in his own state, and him standing against it will only give Obama fuel to show him as a flip-flopper to public opinion, which, like Kerry back in the day, is his main weakness.

I would also say that at this point repeal is probably not possible, no mater how he campaigns. He would need to win the presidency and have a full house and senate dominated by Republicans. As McConnell has ensured we are seen as obstructionist, I would not expect us to hold on to as many seats as we currently have with the upcoming elections, though I doubt we will have the landslide losses we had in 2008.

The best thing we can do for long term conservative legislation is look for ways to improve ACA rather than shoot it down. The nation will have socialized medicine eventually. I see no reason why that can't be the foothold Republicans use to make their mark on the next decade in a positive way.

Though it would be completely out of character with the crazies currently running our party into the ground.
 
2012-06-28 03:43:41 PM  

Zombie DJ: YOU GUYS ARE RUINING THIS BEAUTIFUL DAY WITH ALL THIS ARGUING!


Hey, it's either this or arguing all day if Christina Hendricks is fat or just big boned?
 
2012-06-28 03:43:51 PM  

Phinn: StoneColdAtheist: Then Uncle Sugar posted me to Mogadishu for 25 months. Believe me, there is nothing like living in a libertarian paradise to cure one of that disease.

Witnessing the effects of Somalia's 25 years of socialism should be enough to cure anyone of a delusional faith in socialism.


According to the CIA World Factbook



Government type:

no permanent national government; transitional, parliamentary federal government


If that's not small enough to drown in a bathtub, I don't know what is!
 
2012-06-28 03:43:54 PM  
Let's see if I can fully encompass the feelings here: The Republican'ts are in a rage over something that doesn't effect 75% of them because they're all employed and have health benefits anyway, and the remaining 25% are Job Creators that will be forced to offer their employees some kind of coverage?

Meaning, they weren't offering their employees anything before? That's pretty messed up!
 
2012-06-28 03:43:56 PM  

The_Sponge: And how sad is it that your side had a victory today, and instead of being happy, you get pissy when somebody points out that *GASP* Obama broke a promise.


Single payer would have been a Liberal victory. Reform with a public option would have been a Liberal victory. Having to adopt the Republican idea of an individual mandate just to enact basic protections for Americans, and getting it pass obstruction GOP politicians was a bitter victory for Liberals.

Today was just a failure of the Conservatives and Liberals holding their ground. Liberals are thrilled with this law. It was the compromise to the compromise that they could get. To the extent they are celebrating today is because Conservatives have failed so badly once again.
 
2012-06-28 03:44:07 PM  

weave: What's best about this is the wingnuts planned the word Obamacare to be a derogatory term but now it will live for decades as a term giving a Democrat credit for something that they'll never be able to get rid of because people would go ape about it.


What's best about this is the wingnuts planned the word Obamacare to be a derogatory term but now it will live for decades as a term giving a Democrat credit for something that they'll never be able to get rid of because people would go ape about it.
 
2012-06-28 03:45:00 PM  

xltech: HeartBurnKid: xltech: Well, I will be out of a job in the medical field within 2 years... thanks a lot libs. Small rural clinics like mine will be shut down because of the high cost of compliance. We were already worried about the mandidtory Electronic Records implementation to get reimbursement with Medicare/Medicaid. That alone was going to cost us over $50k. We will be closed within 2 years now.

What new regulations are imposed on clinics by the PPACA? AFAIK, pretty much everything in it deals with insurers, not medical practitioners. Including the mandate that was at issue.

RIght now, we do not have enough staff to take care of all the "prior authorizations" we are forced to deal with. Medicaid in our state is going to require us to prior authorize every procedure, among other things, (no matter how minor like clipping toenails) and we must meet criteria before said procedure can be done. With any more increases, we will need to hire at least one employee full time. We have one Doctor, one PA one nurse and I do all the lab work, EKGs and x-rays, 3 others work in the office for billing, insurance and coding. With reimbursements going down, costs going up and no big hospital sponsoring us... we will be closing. Then, maybe I can get free health care and not work.... let all you libs support me for once!


Still not understanding the issue here. Do you have a lot of cash customers currently that will be paying with insurance instead once this goes into effect? Because I don't think many people can afford to pay cash for healthcare these days, especially not in a "rural" setting.

Or are you bemoaning that, when more people have insurance, you'll have more patients and thus more claims to manage? In that case, you can use some of that extra money the extra patients are bringing in to hire more staff.

Or are you just trying to be difficult for the sake of difficulty?
 
2012-06-28 03:45:06 PM  

NateGrey: Rush had a good point today, would like to hear thoughts by Republicans:


again, the freepers postulated that the only thing that makes sense is that scalia wrote a majority opinion, obama got to roberts somehow (one suggestion was obama had roberts' children) and NOW AMERICA IS RUINED.
FOREVER.
 
2012-06-28 03:45:20 PM  
Idle thoughts with Lawnchair....

I'm just thinking about how much butthurt Scalia/Alito/Thomas must have been in for the last 3 months. As the USSC usually goes, they've known for months how this was going to go down. And couldn't say anything while the right were planning their dance party.

Wonder what Scalia's blood pressure has been the last few months...
 
2012-06-28 03:45:45 PM  

Anti_illuminati: Point 2) sounds like your pushing for more of a single-payer program, which I am 100% for. It's the most economical, cost-effective way to do health care in this country. And you're right about the affordability of catastrophic health policies; average Americans cannot afford their deductibles and OOP expenses. This act is nowhere near perfect, but it is (hopefully) a step in the right direction. I, personally, hope that this individual mandate will change the nations attitude toward single payer, pushing that to the forefront of future health insurance debates with serious consideration. And the payment for doctors, it is troubling and something that needs to be addressed. But with the spiraling cost of healthcare, if we do not start to pull more individuals into the risk pool, the cost of healthcare will only grow.

It's not an ideal situation, but its far, far better than the one we a currently experiencing. My only hope is that congress, and the Rugged Individualists, pull their collective heads out of their asses and start looking at this from a practical, socio-economical level rather than an ideological one.


I'm not sure if this is a better situation than what we had in 2009 before any of this legislation has passed. My year to year costs of just being insured accelerated dramatically once the legislation passed, while my coverage went down(90%->80%->70% year to year for most covered categories/procedures) for the same general Aetna PPO policy, and they have most paralleled for my family under Blue Cross/Blue Shield PPOs in the same state under a different employer. And these are large multinational companies with the capability of shopping for the best policies for their employees.

I am of the mind of either singlepayer or what we had before. You are right that this current legislation may push us to singlepayer, but I think it isn't because it will warm us to the concept and instead because this solution is the worst of both worlds.
 
2012-06-28 03:45:52 PM  

NateGrey

Corvus: Gdalescrboz: As a healthy person who can afford my own insurance i dont care either way abotu this ruling. However, for the people that are going to be required to have it, i feel bad for you. Give it 10 years and you will be looking at certain criteria you have to meet in order to be on a health care plan the government requires you to have. Acohol consumption? Smoking? High risk activities? Burger king? Gambling? Not sure what it will be like, but shiat in your personal life is not going to be the same. For better or for worse, people on required gov't healthcare have lost a chunk of personal freedom. Americans could use big brother taking away their double stacker with double cheese since they can't put it down on their own

Then why don't those rules exist in countries that have had these laws for decades already?

You men government might come in and say things like "You can't have abortions anymore"? That would be horrible!!! Oh wait they already do that!

Havent you heard, England and Canada dont have alcohol and tobacco.

THIS IS WHAT REPUBLICANS ACTUALLY BELIEVE!


England and Canada also aren't looking at 50% obesity. When the gov't realizes they can't afford to pay for all the things caused by our poor diet, shiat will change. This is called critical thinking, lacking it you are. Again, im not saying this is a bad ruling or a good ruling, i jsut think there are goign to be changes that people, people like you who don't bother to think more than a coupel weeks ahead, aren't going to like. I think they will be changes for the good of the population, but it will come at the cost of personal responsibility...which is already dead in the US anyways so no big deal
 
2012-06-28 03:46:04 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Parmenius: Couldn't the tax section in question be easily removed as an amendment to almost any legislation?

Someone mentioned this on twitter and their answer was no, because of the Byrd Rule.

But I'm not a legislator, so don't quote me.


Ahh, interesting, thanks. Still, such a provision would have to be found before passage, and that means they'd have to read the bill. That sounds ... occasionally unlikely.
 
2012-06-28 03:46:22 PM  

MasterThief: Silver lining based on SCOTUSBlog: The mandate was not a legit use of the commerce clause, but it was OK as a tax.

So yes, Obama and the Democrats did, in fact, raise taxes on the middle class. After repeatedly promising not to.


Three problems with that:

1) The mandate will not go into affect until 2014. You cannot say taxes have risen that have not yet gone into affect.

2) Most of the middle class have insurance, so they will not be affected by the mandate. You cannot say a person's taxes have gone up if they do not have to pay the tax.

3) The overall effect of Obamacare will be to lower the cost that we all pay for covering the uninsured. You cannot say taxes have increased for the middle class when, in fact, they will end up being less.

Other than those three things, well, you're still completely wrong.
 
2012-06-28 03:46:42 PM  
i37.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-28 03:46:50 PM  
Seriously, the tards from both sides in this thread are making my head asplode.

FarkConsTM: This is not the end of democracy, stop treating it like it is. Something has to be done about this problem, and I'm not sure what else we can do at this point, given what's in place.

FarkLibsTM: All of you waving your dicks around, saying "HAHA SUCK IT TEABAGGERS WE WIN" may feel differently when, 10 years down the road, your insurance rates go through the roof because all the smaller insurers have been forced out of the market, and there's only a few insurers left. Or a single-payer system that makes you wait months to get anything done.

I'm crossing my fingers on this one, I actually think it's a step in the right direction. How it turns out is anyone's guess.
 
2012-06-28 03:47:11 PM  

Rwa2play: Zombie DJ: YOU GUYS ARE RUINING THIS BEAUTIFUL DAY WITH ALL THIS ARGUING!

Hey, it's either this or arguing all day if Christina Hendricks is fat or just big boned?


that does have the benefit of the images produced into evidence, at least.
 
2012-06-28 03:47:27 PM  
Coco LaFemme: Do it, you raging sack of quivering pussies. If this country you once loved oh so much is now a shell of its former self, and the only way to reclaim its glory is through bloodshed, then start shedding some blood, assholes. Come on, be men for once in your pathetic lives. Prove you have the biggest patriot boners in all the land.

Mr_Ectomy: You give me a socialist boner.


Remember, if it's a socialist boner, then you have to share.
 
2012-06-28 03:47:36 PM  

heap: FOREVER.


Best part?...
 
2012-06-28 03:47:53 PM  

heap: NateGrey: Rush had a good point today, would like to hear thoughts by Republicans:

again, the freepers postulated that the only thing that makes sense is that scalia wrote a majority opinion, obama got to roberts somehow (one suggestion was obama had roberts' children) and NOW AMERICA IS RUINED.
FOREVER.


So he finally he crossed that line between everyday villainy and cartoonish super-villainy?
 
2012-06-28 03:48:29 PM  

farkityfarker: Obamacare is worthless without single payer or at least the public option.

Canadians and Brits are laughing at America, or at least scratching their heads and wondering why.


This Canadians think this reform was necessary as a stop gap measure but yes, American insurance premiums will continue to increase at rate outpacing cost of living increases until you get rid of private insurance for basic care altogether.

If Republicans hadn't resisted the public option, America would have been halfway to a single-payer system by now.
 
2012-06-28 03:48:31 PM  

mrshowrules: Parmenius: 3. Can a governor (I live in Ohio, gah Kasich) simply declare that the state won't comply, and create a several-years-long trainwreck?

Not a lawyer but I would like to comment on the last one. Even the most hardcore Conservative State in the Union likely has 30% of the population that would go ape shiat if their State was breaking the law and it was hurting their health care options in some way.


Supposedly, they're already vowing to (at least, according to this)

Seriously, I wonder sometimes how our country will make it through derp like this. Then I remember, we've been through derp before and survived; this is just the New Derp.
 
2012-06-28 03:48:33 PM  

oh_please: 10 years down the road, your insurance rates go through the roof because all the smaller insurers have been forced out of the market, and there's only a few insurers left.


I'm sorry, did you just wake up from a 20-year coma or something?
 
2012-06-28 03:48:55 PM  

CPennypacker: What increased costs do they have?


The Hospitals and doctors. They will increase their prices because (1) They know that the insurance company can raise premiums (2) Increase in demand for services (they are only so many of them to go around and (3) Fark YOU! because they can, that why.
 
2012-06-28 03:48:58 PM  

oh_please: 10 years down the road, your insurance rates go through the roof


you mean like it's been doing, quite competently, for the 10 years prior?

for real, it'd be one thing if healthcare costs were low and showed no signs of increase to make a point like this, but....that isn't reality.
 
2012-06-28 03:49:00 PM  

Lord Dimwit: ...such a creature exists?

Seriously, good for you I guess, but the official statement of the Party is against all of those things, and by voting for that person, you gave the GOP a larger voting bloc and more power to control the legislature and/or organization to which that person was elected. It's like the people in Germany who vote for The People's Party because TPP wants to increase education spending - never mind that they also want to make sure the education is religious based and have tacitly stated that they want to murder non-Germans.


Yea, his name is Arnold Schwarzenegger. Pity he can't move any higher as far as executive office goes. Unfortunately, west coast Republicans are left sitting on the sidelines. Clint Eastwood is another, and he labels himself an Eisenhower Republican, but he's perfectly happy being an ex-mayor and nothing more.
 
2012-06-28 03:49:10 PM  
I feel I need to restate this.
Attention Derpmasters:

Beginning January 1, 2014, all U.S. residents are required to maintain minimum essential
coverage unless the individual falls into one of the following exceptions:
individuals with a religious conscience exemption (applies only to certain faiths);
incarcerated individuals;
undocumented aliens;
individuals who cannot afford coverage (i.e. required contribution exceeds 8% of
household income
);
individuals with a coverage gap of less than 3 months;
individuals in a hardship situation (as defined by the Secretary of Dept. of Health &
Human Services (HHS));

individuals with income below the tax filing threshold; and
members of Indian tribes.

Now please stop the concern trolling about how this screws over the poor - because it doesn't. If you're rich and you opt out of health insurance coverage, you deserve to pay a fine or tax so that poorer individuals can get better health care. If you're an average person and you have health insurance coverage, guess what? NOTHING HAPPENS TO YOU.
 
2012-06-28 03:49:21 PM  

Phinn: Smelly McUgly: There are a number of ways to measure health care needs and costs even if health care is collectivized under the state.

No, there aren't.

The production of health care involves millions of economic decisions every day, far beyond the decision to visit the provider -- the production of drugs, the making and distributing of the equipment, the building of the facilities, the building of the schools to train the providers, etc. Not one of those decisions can be made on the basis of economic cost and benefit without prices.

Health care will be more or less unchanged at the beginning, since the new system will inherit the mode of consumption and production that's in place as of the day the new system becomes effective. But the system will lose information, and so it will start to become unbalanced immediately, and the economic decisions that comprise the provision of medical services will become progressively discoordinated, which will be experienced as increasing costs and decreasing quality and distribution.


Yes, there really are. I disagree with your premise. Cost/benefit can be made through utilitarian means not related directly to prices, for example, though of course, I'm not a death panel type of guy (and neither is Obama, nutty right-wingers).

As for the system losing information as a matter of collectivizing health care, this is untrue. The idea is that a group of people - essentially a bureaucracy that is more reliable (say, state or, ideally, local control of health care monitoring as opposed to bloated federal monitoring) - is earmarked to spend its time within the community monitoring need and acting accordingly to fill that need by reporting back to the community.

The idea that price is the only thing that can indicate need and cost/benefit is not true. You just don't like the alternatives, which is fine.
 
2012-06-28 03:49:33 PM  

heap: Rwa2play: Zombie DJ: YOU GUYS ARE RUINING THIS BEAUTIFUL DAY WITH ALL THIS ARGUING!

Hey, it's either this or arguing all day if Christina Hendricks is fat or just big boned?

that does have the benefit of the images produced into evidence, at least.


Yeah.

/FTR: She's just curvy
//And if loving her is wrong then I don't wanna be right
 
2012-06-28 03:49:51 PM  

muck4doo: except during the time leading up to the votes, the democrats kept insisting that it is not a tax. if it would have been sold as a tax at that time it would never have passed. therefore, bait-and-switch.

Get over it. I am saying this to you as someone on your side. They won. Give the plan a chance. Don't fight it, let's just see what happens.


sorry, i'm not made that way. you see what bloomberg is doing in ny? that's our future.
 
2012-06-28 03:49:52 PM  

Lord Dimwit:
So he finally he crossed that line between everyday villainy and cartoonish super-villainy?


let's put it this way - i have 40 cakes, and i'm hiding them.
 
2012-06-28 03:49:55 PM  

HeartBurnKid: Or are you just trying to be difficult for the sake of difficulty?


He needs a bottle and a nap.
 
2012-06-28 03:49:59 PM  
"As president, Mitt will nominate judges in the mold of Chief Justice Roberts ..." - MittRomney.com.

This hasn't been taken down yet, it's still there.
 
2012-06-28 03:50:18 PM  

oh_please: FarkConsTM: This is not the end of democracy, stop treating it like it is. Something has to be done about this problem, and I'm not sure what else we can do at this point, given what's in place.

FarkLibsTM: All of you waving your dicks around, saying "HAHA SUCK IT TEABAGGERS WE WIN" may feel differently when, 10 years down the road, your insurance rates go through the roof because all the smaller insurers have been forced out of the market, and there's only a few insurers left. Or a single-payer system that makes you wait months to get anything done.


You sound concerned.
 
Displayed 50 of 3382 comments

First | « | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | » | Last

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report