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.

(The New York Times)   Minnesota insurer inadvertently speaks the truth about the ACA: "We have to break people away from the choice habit that everyone has"   (nytimes.com) divider line 210
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

2426 clicks; posted to Politics » on 13 May 2014 at 2:17 PM (14 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-05-13 03:19:11 PM

mrshowrules: Lucky LaRue: mrshowrules: Lucky LaRue: mrshowrules: jigger: mrshowrules: SlothB77: but all of those experts who are smarter than everyone else said these plans would be better.

No matter what kind of health plan consumers choose, they will find fewer doctors and hospitals in their network - or pay much more for the privilege of going to any provider they want.

You get to pick any plan you want offered by the free market, sir.

That would be illegal, sir.

No.

Well, yeah, it is illegal.  I can't buy a policy that doesn't meet the mandated requirements set forward by ACA and insurance companies can't offer it.  The free market has been circumvented by government interference.

Read again and pay attention to the words and such.

Well, one of us isn't paying attention to the words...  If I can pick any plan offered by the free market, then I can pick a plan that doesn't meet the ACA requirements.  I can't pick a plan that doesn't meet ACA requirements, so I can't pick any plan offered by the free market.

That tautology seems to make sense, unless you are defining "free market" to mean the market that is freed by the regulations and restrictions placed on it by government.

Are you being dense on purpose.  Insurance companies are only offering plans that are legal.  It is legal to pick any of those plans.  Why is this complicated?  You are wrong.  I was right.  Full stop.

If you want to talk about it being unfair to prevent insurance companies from offering any type of bullshiat plan they want to, that is another subject.


Oh, so you *were* arguing that a regulated market is a free market.  That makes sense.
 
2014-05-13 03:19:41 PM

Gwyrddu: Lucky LaRue: Being born poor doesn't preclude you from bettering yourself economically. Making bad choices does that, and the liberal ideology that enforces the belief that the bad choices you make aren't your fault enables it.

Everyone makes bad choices in their life. The difference is that the richer and higher status you are the easier it is to recover from those bad choices. That poor people have any opportunities to better themselves is mostly thanks to liberal policies, from public schooling to Pell Grants to public transportion and school lunch program and food stamps.


But paying for these things is an utter inconvenience to the wealthy, even though it affords those poor the opportunity to become upwardly mobile and thus more economically productive members of society, allowing them to increase their income and become net tax payers themselves. But don't you see, it's still wrong to inconvenience the rich for reasons and some terrible writer said that was bad, see.
 
2014-05-13 03:21:21 PM

MattStafford: UrukHaiGuyz: Fair enough. I understand there are trade-offs, but calling it "suffering" when the flipside was people with no hope of access to care is more than a bit callous. "Inconvenience" might be a better word, but it's hard to make that sound bad, I guess.

Yeah, suffering may not have been the best word to use.

UrukHaiGuyz: Too many steps to be practical. Why not just adopt government funded free-to-access healthcare. You could do it simply by expanding Medicaid to cover everyone, or by nationalizing the healthcare system.

Where is the incentive for providers to keep costs down?  My fear is that it'd end up like college tuition where there is essentially a limitless amount of money going from the government to the consumers (with college it'd be via loans, but the concept is the same) which results in no reason for the providers to keep costs down.  I feel market forces for day to day costs would result in lower prices and better service.


We already have some of the worst health outcomes relative to per capita healthcare spending. Costs would be kept down due to the increased leverage an expanded Medicare/Medicaid would wield, or in a nationalized system we'd have a more direct say as a country in cost/benefit analyses.

Also, I'd be out of a job.

That's a bummer, but not really a reason to base policy on.
 
2014-05-13 03:22:13 PM

Lucky LaRue: Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: except that they do pay taxes, just not income taxes. They pay sales, payroll and any taxes their state or local governments enact that effect them. The poor are the people working jobs that keep society running smoothly for the 'productive members'

Oh, don't mind me, I was just having fun with the rhetoric. It was about as useless as the below post.

Crotchrocket Slim: Lucky LaRue: Look mommy, I don't understand anything about anything so I'll just make strawmen on Fark instead

Hey, gotta work with what I am given here, not like  LaRue's interested in serious conversation when he posts debunked Limbaugh rhetoric.

"Debunked Limbaugh rhetoric"?  Seriously?  I think you are just making shiat up, now to avoid looking foolish.  What Limbaugh rhetoric, exactly, and how was it debunked?


You were depantsed by another Farker responding to your response to mine.

UrukHaiGuyz: Lucky LaRue: Being born poor doesn't preclude you from bettering yourself economically

An American born at the bottom has about an 8 percent chance of rising to the top, it found; the odds are twice that in Denmark.

Not great odds. According to the link, it's not any worse than it was 20 years ago, but we've fallen behind the rest of the industrial world. So much for exceptionalism.


Read up instead of ignoring posts you got nothing to argue against with.
 
2014-05-13 03:24:43 PM

Lucky LaRue: With all the possible solutions available, the Democrats choose the one that steals money out of the pockets of the middle class, but I'm the asshole.. Liberals love to bemoan the death of the middle class, but they and their redistribution of wealth taxation plans are to blame for it.


This isn't the plan Obama wanted. He had to compromise with the obsructionist congress.
 
2014-05-13 03:25:07 PM

Crotchrocket Slim: Lucky LaRue: Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: except that they do pay taxes, just not income taxes. They pay sales, payroll and any taxes their state or local governments enact that effect them. The poor are the people working jobs that keep society running smoothly for the 'productive members'

Oh, don't mind me, I was just having fun with the rhetoric. It was about as useless as the below post.

Crotchrocket Slim: Lucky LaRue: Look mommy, I don't understand anything about anything so I'll just make strawmen on Fark instead

Hey, gotta work with what I am given here, not like  LaRue's interested in serious conversation when he posts debunked Limbaugh rhetoric.

"Debunked Limbaugh rhetoric"?  Seriously?  I think you are just making shiat up, now to avoid looking foolish.  What Limbaugh rhetoric, exactly, and how was it debunked?

You were depantsed by another Farker responding to your response to mine.


Seriously, what are you contributing?  You come into this thread with juvenile bullying tactics and spend the rest of your effort on defending your childish behavior.  Have you added anything of value, yet?
 
2014-05-13 03:27:44 PM

Mugato: Lucky LaRue: With all the possible solutions available, the Democrats choose the one that steals money out of the pockets of the middle class, but I'm the asshole.. Liberals love to bemoan the death of the middle class, but they and their redistribution of wealth taxation plans are to blame for it.

This isn't the plan Obama wanted. He had to compromise with the obsructionist congress.


Oh, I see.  Despite the fact that it was passed when the Democrats held the House, Senate, and White House, the Republican's are responsible for ACA.

I don't think there has ever been a time when one party controlled so much of the process of governing yet blamed the other party for it's failure to govern.
 
2014-05-13 03:29:28 PM

Lucky LaRue: Crotchrocket Slim: Lucky LaRue: Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: except that they do pay taxes, just not income taxes. They pay sales, payroll and any taxes their state or local governments enact that effect them. The poor are the people working jobs that keep society running smoothly for the 'productive members'

Oh, don't mind me, I was just having fun with the rhetoric. It was about as useless as the below post.

Crotchrocket Slim: Lucky LaRue: Look mommy, I don't understand anything about anything so I'll just make strawmen on Fark instead

Hey, gotta work with what I am given here, not like  LaRue's interested in serious conversation when he posts debunked Limbaugh rhetoric.

"Debunked Limbaugh rhetoric"?  Seriously?  I think you are just making shiat up, now to avoid looking foolish.  What Limbaugh rhetoric, exactly, and how was it debunked?

You were depantsed by another Farker responding to your response to mine.

Seriously, what are you contributing?  You come into this thread with juvenile bullying tactics and spend the rest of your effort on defending your childish behavior.  Have you added anything of value, yet?


I'm sorry, have you? You're not really the one to be criticizing others on the lack of adding anything that contributes to the thread, even while ignoring the one semi-serious post I did make to this thread.

Crotchrocket Slim: Gwyrddu: Lucky LaRue: Being born poor doesn't preclude you from bettering yourself economically. Making bad choices does that, and the liberal ideology that enforces the belief that the bad choices you make aren't your fault enables it.

Everyone makes bad choices in their life. The difference is that the richer and higher status you are the easier it is to recover from those bad choices. That poor people have any opportunities to better themselves is mostly thanks to liberal policies, from public schooling to Pell Grants to public transportion and school lunch program and food stamps.

But paying for these things is an utter inconvenience to the wealthy, even though it affords those poor the opportunity to become upwardly mobile and thus more economically productive members of society, allowing them to increase their income and become net tax payers themselves. But don't you see, it's still wrong to inconvenience the rich for reasons and some terrible writer said that was bad, see.


Argue against the bold.
 
2014-05-13 03:29:57 PM
You guys know he's a troll - you know it - and yet you continue feeding the troll. Is it still entertaining to some people even when the trolling is so transparent? By all means keep doing it if you want, but what's the point?
 
2014-05-13 03:30:12 PM

Lucky LaRue: Mugato: Lucky LaRue: With all the possible solutions available, the Democrats choose the one that steals money out of the pockets of the middle class, but I'm the asshole.. Liberals love to bemoan the death of the middle class, but they and their redistribution of wealth taxation plans are to blame for it.

This isn't the plan Obama wanted. He had to compromise with the obsructionist congress.

Oh, I see.  Despite the fact that it was passed when the Democrats held the House, Senate, and White House, the Republican's are responsible for ACA.

I don't think there has ever been a time when one party controlled so much of the process of governing yet blamed the other party for it's failure to govern.


"Serious contribution to the thread" huh?
 
2014-05-13 03:30:18 PM
MattStafford:
Also, I'd be out of a job.

Look on the bright side.

Those coconuts won't sell themselves.
 
2014-05-13 03:31:46 PM

Lucky LaRue: Seriously, what are you contributing? You come into this thread with juvenile bullying tactics and spend the rest of your effort on defending your childish behavior. Have you added anything of value, yet?


Here, have a wheel of Swiss.  Sounds like you need it.
 
2014-05-13 03:32:40 PM

what_now: netizencain: About 10 million people now have insurance because of ACA... something like that, right?  So like 3% of the population?  I dunno, I'm pretty farking stupid but taking away options for a lot of Americans in order to help 3% seems pretty crappy.  Maybe things will just take time to balance out.  I'll wait ten years and then pass judgement on this.

Are you willfully ignorant or just trolling?

Everyone benefits under the ACA because preexisting conditions and lifetime limits are no longer allowed. Everyone benefits because people without insurance will stop using the ER as a PCP.


Whynotboth.jpg
 
2014-05-13 03:32:53 PM

UrukHaiGuyz: We already have some of the worst health outcomes relative to per capita healthcare spending. Costs would be kept down due to the increased leverage an expanded Medicare/Medicaid would wield, or in a nationalized system we'd have a more direct say as a country in cost/benefit analyses.


I understand that aspect of the argument, but I also look at something like Lasik and wonder if would see something similar if we let the market work with other health care situations.  To make a poor analogy, we could probably feed the US with a universal food stamp program, but wouldn't we rather let the market work and take care of the people who can't afford it?  Better prices, better (well, arguably) food, etc.

UrukHaiGuyz: That's a bummer, but not really a reason to base policy on.


Says you
 
2014-05-13 03:33:15 PM

Lucky LaRue: mrshowrules: Lucky LaRue: mrshowrules: Lucky LaRue: mrshowrules: jigger: mrshowrules: SlothB77: but all of those experts who are smarter than everyone else said these plans would be better.

No matter what kind of health plan consumers choose, they will find fewer doctors and hospitals in their network - or pay much more for the privilege of going to any provider they want.

You get to pick any plan you want offered by the free market, sir.

That would be illegal, sir.

No.

Well, yeah, it is illegal.  I can't buy a policy that doesn't meet the mandated requirements set forward by ACA and insurance companies can't offer it.  The free market has been circumvented by government interference.

Read again and pay attention to the words and such.

Well, one of us isn't paying attention to the words...  If I can pick any plan offered by the free market, then I can pick a plan that doesn't meet the ACA requirements.  I can't pick a plan that doesn't meet ACA requirements, so I can't pick any plan offered by the free market.

That tautology seems to make sense, unless you are defining "free market" to mean the market that is freed by the regulations and restrictions placed on it by government.

Are you being dense on purpose.  Insurance companies are only offering plans that are legal.  It is legal to pick any of those plans.  Why is this complicated?  You are wrong.  I was right.  Full stop.

If you want to talk about it being unfair to prevent insurance companies from offering any type of bullshiat plan they want to, that is another subject.

Oh, so you *were* arguing that a regulated market is a free market.  That makes sense.


I was trying to establish if you were being dense on purpose.  Still not clear.

New subject.  Should we call regulated markets free markets?  As all markets are regulated to some degree or another, I would say yes but perhaps a definition would be useful.

free market: an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses.

by this definition, health insurance is still a free market service
 
2014-05-13 03:33:50 PM

Riothamus: Look on the bright side.

Those coconuts won't sell themselves.


Can't disagree with you there.
 
2014-05-13 03:35:20 PM

Gwyrddu: Everyone makes bad choices in their life. The difference is that the richer and higher status you are the easier it is to recover from those bad choices. That poor people have any opportunities to better themselves is mostly thanks to liberal policies, from public schooling to Pell Grants to public transportion and school lunch program and food stamps.


Wow the saddest part is progressives actually believe this. Only through their benevolence has anything gotten any better for anyone since well...forever. Anyone not a progressive doesn't care about anyone else and is basically a monster.
 
2014-05-13 03:37:02 PM

Crotchrocket Slim: Being borne poor and lacking opportunity to better oneself economically is now a "bad life choice", gotcha shill.


I will admit that I was born poor. I didn't have any opportunities that weren't common to the vast majority of people. But, I have done extremely well for myself over the years. I don't consider myself 'lucky'. Nor do I think anybody else could do it. I do not fault the poor for not being successful. It is just that I am far far better than they are. The poor may have had the same oportunities that I did, but they are inherently too incompetent to take advantage of basic resources around them. I have only done well because I am a much better person.  It is not so much the bad choices people make, it is just that they are basically failures from the start.
 
2014-05-13 03:37:04 PM
trollthreadbarbosa.jpg
 
2014-05-13 03:38:00 PM

walkingtall: Gwyrddu: Everyone makes bad choices in their life. The difference is that the richer and higher status you are the easier it is to recover from those bad choices. That poor people have any opportunities to better themselves is mostly thanks to liberal policies, from public schooling to Pell Grants to public transportion and school lunch program and food stamps.

Wow the saddest part is progressives actually believe this. Only through their benevolence has anything gotten any better for anyone since well...forever. Anyone not a progressive doesn't care about anyone else and is basically a monster.


Then why is private charity never been enough to replace the social infrastructure and make it so people do not have to resort to becoming modern-day highwaymen and the like?
 
2014-05-13 03:40:06 PM

Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Being borne poor and lacking opportunity to better oneself economically is now a "bad life choice", gotcha shill.

I will admit that I was born poor. I didn't have any opportunities that weren't common to the vast majority of people. But, I have done extremely well for myself over the years. I don't consider myself 'lucky'. Nor do I think anybody else could do it. I do not fault the poor for not being successful. It is just that I am far far better than they are. The poor may have had the same oportunities that I did, but they are inherently too incompetent to take advantage of basic resources around them. I have only done well because I am a much better person.  It is not so much the bad choices people make, it is just that they are basically failures from the start.


And how many of those opportunities to better yourself came in the form of subsidized student loans, grants, and the like? In case you're not Poe's Lawlzing your ass off here and people narcissistic enough to actually believe this sort of tripe?
 
2014-05-13 03:41:07 PM

Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Being borne poor and lacking opportunity to better oneself economically is now a "bad life choice", gotcha shill.

I will admit that I was born poor. I didn't have any opportunities that weren't common to the vast majority of people. But, I have done extremely well for myself over the years. I don't consider myself 'lucky'. Nor do I think anybody else could do it. I do not fault the poor for not being successful. It is just that I am far far better than they are. The poor may have had the same oportunities that I did, but they are inherently too incompetent to take advantage of basic resources around them. I have only done well because I am a much better person.  It is not so much the bad choices people make, it is just that they are basically failures from the start.

And how many of those opportunities to better yourself came in the form of subsidized student loans, grants, and the like? In case you're not Poe's Lawlzing your ass off here at people narcissistic enough to actually believe this sort of tripe?


Slim needs a proofreader
 
2014-05-13 03:42:31 PM

MattStafford: UrukHaiGuyz: We already have some of the worst health outcomes relative to per capita healthcare spending. Costs would be kept down due to the increased leverage an expanded Medicare/Medicaid would wield, or in a nationalized system we'd have a more direct say as a country in cost/benefit analyses.

I understand that aspect of the argument, but I also look at something like Lasik and wonder if would see something similar if we let the market work with other health care situations.  To make a poor analogy, we could probably feed the US with a universal food stamp program, but wouldn't we rather let the market work and take care of the people who can't afford it?  Better prices, better (well, arguably) food, etc.


Why couldn't you create "MARPA" or something to develop new cutting edge products and technologies, but with a primarily medical bent? As it is, DARPA's at the front of a lot of medical tech. I think the U.S. should be investing vastly more in basic research of all types, though.
 
2014-05-13 03:45:09 PM

UrukHaiGuyz: MattStafford: UrukHaiGuyz: We already have some of the worst health outcomes relative to per capita healthcare spending. Costs would be kept down due to the increased leverage an expanded Medicare/Medicaid would wield, or in a nationalized system we'd have a more direct say as a country in cost/benefit analyses.

I understand that aspect of the argument, but I also look at something like Lasik and wonder if would see something similar if we let the market work with other health care situations.  To make a poor analogy, we could probably feed the US with a universal food stamp program, but wouldn't we rather let the market work and take care of the people who can't afford it?  Better prices, better (well, arguably) food, etc.

Why couldn't you create "MARPA" or something to develop new cutting edge products and technologies, but with a primarily medical bent? As it is, DARPA's at the front of a lot of medical tech. I think the U.S. should be investing vastly more in basic research of all types, though.


Bonus income from other nations paying to use our publicly-financed tech development that isn't US taxpayer dollars. It's like how NASA tech development has always been an exceptionally profitable thing, if and when we actually fund NASA.
 
2014-05-13 03:45:21 PM

Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Being borne poor and lacking opportunity to better oneself economically is now a "bad life choice", gotcha shill.

I will admit that I was born poor. I didn't have any opportunities that weren't common to the vast majority of people. But, I have done extremely well for myself over the years. I don't consider myself 'lucky'. Nor do I think anybody else could do it. I do not fault the poor for not being successful. It is just that I am far far better than they are. The poor may have had the same oportunities that I did, but they are inherently too incompetent to take advantage of basic resources around them. I have only done well because I am a much better person.  It is not so much the bad choices people make, it is just that they are basically failures from the start.

And how many of those opportunities to better yourself came in the form of subsidized student loans, grants, and the like? In case you're not Poe's Lawlzing your ass off here and people narcissistic enough to actually believe this sort of tripe?


Oh, I do love me some Poe. But no student loans or grants. just a GI Bill that I paid dearly for.

But I did always see this as the other side of the 'we all have the same opportunities' argument.  Either they made bad choices with the same opportunities, or I am just naturally a far superior person given the same opportunities.
 
2014-05-13 03:46:40 PM

Lucky LaRue: Oh, I see.  Despite the fact that it was passed when the Democrats held the House, Senate, and White House, the Republican's are responsible for ACA


Yeah, definitely a troll. Sorry for biting.
 
2014-05-13 03:46:59 PM

Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Being borne poor and lacking opportunity to better oneself economically is now a "bad life choice", gotcha shill.

I will admit that I was born poor. I didn't have any opportunities that weren't common to the vast majority of people. But, I have done extremely well for myself over the years. I don't consider myself 'lucky'. Nor do I think anybody else could do it. I do not fault the poor for not being successful. It is just that I am far far better than they are. The poor may have had the same oportunities that I did, but they are inherently too incompetent to take advantage of basic resources around them. I have only done well because I am a much better person.  It is not so much the bad choices people make, it is just that they are basically failures from the start.

And how many of those opportunities to better yourself came in the form of subsidized student loans, grants, and the like? In case you're not Poe's Lawlzing your ass off here and people narcissistic enough to actually believe this sort of tripe?

Oh, I do love me some Poe. But no student loans or grants. just a GI Bill that I paid dearly for.

But I did always see this as the other side of the 'we all have the same opportunities' argument.  Either they made bad choices with the same opportunities, or I am just naturally a far superior person given the same opportunities.


A hypocrite is you, the military being the very definition of one of the most socialist organizations around.
 
2014-05-13 03:47:29 PM

Lando Lincoln: Lucky LaRue: ACA isn't about choice - it's about bringing everyone down to the lowest denominator so that poor and lazy people aren't offended by people who work hard to get ahead in life.

Are you trolling or are you a sincere asshole? I just want to know.


What "Lucky LaRue" said is what wingnuts actually believe.
 
2014-05-13 03:47:40 PM

Crotchrocket Slim: Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Being borne poor and lacking opportunity to better oneself economically is now a "bad life choice", gotcha shill.

I will admit that I was born poor. I didn't have any opportunities that weren't common to the vast majority of people. But, I have done extremely well for myself over the years. I don't consider myself 'lucky'. Nor do I think anybody else could do it. I do not fault the poor for not being successful. It is just that I am far far better than they are. The poor may have had the same oportunities that I did, but they are inherently too incompetent to take advantage of basic resources around them. I have only done well because I am a much better person.  It is not so much the bad choices people make, it is just that they are basically failures from the start.

And how many of those opportunities to better yourself came in the form of subsidized student loans, grants, and the like? In case you're not Poe's Lawlzing your ass off here at people narcissistic enough to actually believe this sort of tripe?

Slim needs a proofreader


Well, be a job creator and hire yourself one. Economy's not gonna fix itself, sweetheart.
 
2014-05-13 03:48:47 PM
BTW I'm a taxpayer now instead of a welfare recipient through the opportunity to go to college on a massive amount of student loans (which I'm repaying) and federal and state grants (which I now pay for for others to use by way of my state and federal income taxes).
 
2014-05-13 03:49:55 PM

rzrwiresunrise: Crotchrocket Slim: Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Being borne poor and lacking opportunity to better oneself economically is now a "bad life choice", gotcha shill.

I will admit that I was born poor. I didn't have any opportunities that weren't common to the vast majority of people. But, I have done extremely well for myself over the years. I don't consider myself 'lucky'. Nor do I think anybody else could do it. I do not fault the poor for not being successful. It is just that I am far far better than they are. The poor may have had the same oportunities that I did, but they are inherently too incompetent to take advantage of basic resources around them. I have only done well because I am a much better person.  It is not so much the bad choices people make, it is just that they are basically failures from the start.

And how many of those opportunities to better yourself came in the form of subsidized student loans, grants, and the like? In case you're not Poe's Lawlzing your ass off here at people narcissistic enough to actually believe this sort of tripe?

Slim needs a proofreader

Well, be a job creator and hire yourself one. Economy's not gonna fix itself, sweetheart.


Maybe I could recruit a  redshirtmilitary recruit away from the Military Industrial Complex?
 
2014-05-13 03:53:32 PM

Crotchrocket Slim: Maybe I could recruit a  redshirtmilitary recruit away from the Military Industrial Complex?


You'd just be giving him more of a reason to feel all superior and shiat.
 
2014-05-13 03:56:10 PM

Mugato: Lucky LaRue: Oh, I see.  Despite the fact that it was passed when the Democrats held the House, Senate, and White House, the Republican's are responsible for ACA

Yeah, definitely a troll. Sorry for biting.


Notice once I started posting as seriously as I care to on Fark, he bails from the thread.
 
2014-05-13 03:58:31 PM

Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Being borne poor and lacking opportunity to better oneself economically is now a "bad life choice", gotcha shill.

I will admit that I was born poor. I didn't have any opportunities that weren't common to the vast majority of people. But, I have done extremely well for myself over the years. I don't consider myself 'lucky'. Nor do I think anybody else could do it. I do not fault the poor for not being successful. It is just that I am far far better than they are. The poor may have had the same oportunities that I did, but they are inherently too incompetent to take advantage of basic resources around them. I have only done well because I am a much better person.  It is not so much the bad choices people make, it is just that they are basically failures from the start.

And how many of those opportunities to better yourself came in the form of subsidized student loans, grants, and the like? In case you're not Poe's Lawlzing your ass off here and people narcissistic enough to actually believe this sort of tripe?

Oh, I do love me some Poe. But no student loans or grants. just a GI Bill that I paid dearly for.

But I did always see this as the other side of the 'we all have the same opportunities' argument.  Either they made bad choices with the same opportunities, or I am just naturally a far superior person given the same opportunities.

A hypocrite is you, the military being the very definition of one of the most socialist organizations around.


Yeah, the whole military structure seems at odds with democracy in general.  But when you voluntarily join the military (not the guys screwed over by the draft), you agree to surrender the vast majority of your rights and priveledges in order to protect those of others.  For which you are given much less than a living wage, but are simultaneously given all the support you would get as if you lived in a parents house.  But you are not even a little bit 'free'.  Basically, I had one asset I could sell, and so I sold several years of my life to what amounts to indentured servitude. I'd hardly call it socialism. More like bondage.
 
2014-05-13 04:09:27 PM

UrukHaiGuyz: Why couldn't you create "MARPA" or something to develop new cutting edge products and technologies, but with a primarily medical bent? As it is, DARPA's at the front of a lot of medical tech. I think the U.S. should be investing vastly more in basic research of all types, though.


You could, the two don't have to be mutually exclusive.  Even if we are funding R+D via the government, the private sector would be better at getting the technology to the public in an affordable manner.

Off topic, but instead of government funded research, we should do prizes.  One billion dollars for the first team to develop a drug that does X, government gets the patent.  Just a thought.
 
2014-05-13 04:11:20 PM
I like the way things were before Obamacare.  You had CHOICE.

If you had decent health care, you could CHOOSE whether or not you wanted to go to the doctor.

If you didn't have health insurance, you could CHOOSE whether to bankrupt your family and die or to just die.
 
2014-05-13 04:11:27 PM

Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Being borne poor and lacking opportunity to better oneself economically is now a "bad life choice", gotcha shill.

I will admit that I was born poor. I didn't have any opportunities that weren't common to the vast majority of people. But, I have done extremely well for myself over the years. I don't consider myself 'lucky'. Nor do I think anybody else could do it. I do not fault the poor for not being successful. It is just that I am far far better than they are. The poor may have had the same oportunities that I did, but they are inherently too incompetent to take advantage of basic resources around them. I have only done well because I am a much better person.  It is not so much the bad choices people make, it is just that they are basically failures from the start.

And how many of those opportunities to better yourself came in the form of subsidized student loans, grants, and the like? In case you're not Poe's Lawlzing your ass off here and people narcissistic enough to actually believe this sort of tripe?

Oh, I do love me some Poe. But no student loans or grants. just a GI Bill that I paid dearly for.

But I did always see this as the other side of the 'we all have the same opportunities' argument.  Either they made bad choices with the same opportunities, or I am just naturally a far superior person given the same opportunities.

A hypocrite is you, the military being the very definition of one of the most socialist organizations around.

Yeah, the whole military structure seems at odds with democracy in general.  But when you voluntarily join the military (not the guys screwed over by the draft), you agree to surrender the vast majority of your rights and priveledges in order to protect those of others.  For which you are given much less than a living wage, but are simultaneously given all the support you would get as if you lived in a parents house.  But you are not eve ...


And how is paying student loans back or paying income taxes "free"? And how is that fair to people whose physical conditions preclude military service yet they might have sharp minds and the drive and ability to still be contributing members of society, but lack the financial means to better themselves and be upwardly mobile?
 
2014-05-13 04:11:35 PM
If you want affordable healthcare you'll need to get over the society of hypochondria and close about half the teaching hospitals, or at least make sure the foreigners who come here to learn medicine GO HOME AND PRACTICE THERE. We have to reduce demand, and we have to curtail supply. There's just too damned much "healthcare" going on in this country and it's not healthy.
 
2014-05-13 04:11:47 PM

Lucky LaRue: Oh, so you *were* arguing that a regulated market is a free market.  That makes sense.


Most free-marketeers don't know what they mean when they say "free market" in their blithe advocacy for it; the rest are being completely disingenuous. The fact is there can never be a "free" market that allows anyone to execute commerce in any fashion they like since there will always be the call for some kind of regulation somewhere in the production-distribution-consumption chain. No business wants to have to test out their back-end manufacturer or raw materials producer only to find they sell a shoddy product. Businesses demand some level of standardization and regulation upfront because litigating bills of goods every time they fall short of specs is wasteful. It's also wasteful for businesses to have to enforce those spec standards instead of having government regulators do it. Allowing the government to regulate the market streamlines the process and makes it possible to operate in one where almost all players play by the rules. It's much more efficient than a wild west "free market" scenario that these knuckle-heads invent in their own fantasies.
 
2014-05-13 04:14:49 PM

Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Tricky Chicken: Crotchrocket Slim: Being borne poor and lacking opportunity to better oneself economically is now a "bad life choice", gotcha shill.

I will admit that I was born poor. I didn't have any opportunities that weren't common to the vast majority of people. But, I have done extremely well for myself over the years. I don't consider myself 'lucky'. Nor do I think anybody else could do it. I do not fault the poor for not being successful. It is just that I am far far better than they are. The poor may have had the same oportunities that I did, but they are inherently too incompetent to take advantage of basic resources around them. I have only done well because I am a much better person.  It is not so much the bad choices people make, it is just that they are basically failures from the start.

And how many of those opportunities to better yourself came in the form of subsidized student loans, grants, and the like? In case you're not Poe's Lawlzing your ass off here and people narcissistic enough to actually believe this sort of tripe?

Oh, I do love me some Poe. But no student loans or grants. just a GI Bill that I paid dearly for.

But I did always see this as the other side of the 'we all have the same opportunities' argument.  Either they made bad choices with the same opportunities, or I am just naturally a far superior person given the same opportunities.

A hypocrite is you, the military being the very definition of one of the most socialist organizations around.

Yeah, the whole military structure seems at odds with democracy in general.  But when you voluntarily join the military (not the guys screwed over by the draft), you agree to surrender the vast majority of your rights and priveledges in order to protect those of others.  For which you are given much less than a living wage, but are simultaneously given all the support you would get as if you lived in a parents house.  But ...


... not that military service is a bad opportunity here, just saying it should not be the only one.
 
2014-05-13 04:18:56 PM

wildcardjack: If you want affordable healthcare you'll need to get over the society of hypochondria and close about half the teaching hospitals, or at least make sure the foreigners who come here to learn medicine GO HOME AND PRACTICE THERE. We have to reduce demand, and we have to curtail supply. There's just too damned much "healthcare" going on in this country and it's not healthy.


You realize that teaching hospitals are where most doctors gain experience to better treat patients? And if nothing else there would be many areas underserved by not having a medical facility close enough to them to save their lives before they die (in the case of medical emergency).

How is preventative care a bad thing anyway? Why don't you get a bit more specific about what isn't "necessary" healthcare? I need a good laugh.
 
2014-05-13 04:21:07 PM

mrshowrules: karnal: "Obamacare cancels the policy you wanted to keep and tells you what policy to buy."

How American!
How Democratic!

You can tell someone has no argument when he is forced to offer a false argument.


Buying insurance under the ACA is not how insurance typically works.....You can always cancel your coverage, but you can't always buy it.  Try buying it after the deadline and:
cgoldmarketing.com
 
2014-05-13 04:26:06 PM

gimmegimme: I like the way things were before Obamacare.  You had CHOICE.

If you had decent health care, you could CHOOSE whether or not you wanted to go to the doctor.

If you didn't have health insurance, you could CHOOSE whether to bankrupt your family and die or to just die.


You name is indicative of the entitlement mentality of today's democratic party.
 
2014-05-13 04:26:30 PM

karnal: mrshowrules: karnal: "Obamacare cancels the policy you wanted to keep and tells you what policy to buy."

How American!
How Democratic!

You can tell someone has no argument when he is forced to offer a false argument.

Buying insurance under the ACA is not how insurance typically works.....You can always cancel your coverage, but you can't always buy it.  Try buying it after the deadline and:
[cgoldmarketing.com image 225x151]


You think enrollment periods are new? How droll.
 
2014-05-13 04:29:07 PM

karnal: gimmegimme: I like the way things were before Obamacare.  You had CHOICE.

If you had decent health care, you could CHOOSE whether or not you wanted to go to the doctor.

If you didn't have health insurance, you could CHOOSE whether to bankrupt your family and die or to just die.

You name is indicative of the entitlement mentality of today's democratic party.


That's a great argument.  No wonder conservatives have such a great reputation for employing logic and reason.
 
2014-05-13 04:33:58 PM

gimmegimme: karnal: gimmegimme: I like the way things were before Obamacare.  You had CHOICE.

If you had decent health care, you could CHOOSE whether or not you wanted to go to the doctor.

If you didn't have health insurance, you could CHOOSE whether to bankrupt your family and die or to just die.

You name is indicative of the entitlement mentality of today's democratic party.

That's a great argument.  No wonder conservatives have such a great reputation for employing logic and reason.


Health care's for closers.

/Seriously, that's basically conservative health policy.
 
2014-05-13 04:35:57 PM

Lucky LaRue: Lando Lincoln: Lucky LaRue: ACA isn't about choice - it's about bringing everyone down to the lowest denominator so that poor and lazy people aren't offended by people who work hard to get ahead in life.

Are you trolling or are you a sincere asshole? I just want to know.

With all the possible solutions available, the Democrats choose the one that steals money out of the pockets of the middle class, but I'm the asshole.. Liberals love to bemoan the death of the middle class, but they and their redistribution of wealth taxation plans are to blame for it.


You capitalized Democrats. It's a dead giveaway that you're not a true conservative.
 
2014-05-13 04:36:37 PM

Bloody William: gimmegimme: karnal: gimmegimme: I like the way things were before Obamacare.  You had CHOICE.

If you had decent health care, you could CHOOSE whether or not you wanted to go to the doctor.

If you didn't have health insurance, you could CHOOSE whether to bankrupt your family and die or to just die.

You name is indicative of the entitlement mentality of today's democratic party.

That's a great argument.  No wonder conservatives have such a great reputation for employing logic and reason.

Health care's for closers.

/Seriously, that's basically conservative health policy.


They should be more upfront about that... at least it's a badass movie reference.
 
2014-05-13 04:36:49 PM

Bloody William: gimmegimme: karnal: gimmegimme: I like the way things were before Obamacare.  You had CHOICE.

If you had decent health care, you could CHOOSE whether or not you wanted to go to the doctor.

If you didn't have health insurance, you could CHOOSE whether to bankrupt your family and die or to just die.

You name is indicative of the entitlement mentality of today's democratic party.

That's a great argument.  No wonder conservatives have such a great reputation for employing logic and reason.

Health care's for closers.

/Seriously, that's basically conservative health policy.


llwproductions.files.wordpress.com

www.quickmeme.com
 
2014-05-13 04:42:08 PM

karnal: Buying insurance under the ACA is not how insurance typically works.....You can always cancel your coverage, but you can't always buy it.  Try buying it after the deadline and:


if you meet certain criteria, you'll get it.

Examples of being able to buy insurance outside of the enrollment period include:

* Marriage, having a baby, adopting a child or placing a child for adoption or foster care, moving your residence, gaining citizenship, leaving incarceration.

* Losing other health coverage-due to losing job-based coverage, divorce, the end of an individual policy plan year in 2014, COBRA expiration, aging off a parent's plan, losing eligibility for Medicaid or CHIP, and similar circumstances. Important: Voluntarily ending coverage doesn't qualify you for a special enrollment period. Neither does losing coverage that doesn't qualify as minimum essential coverage.

* For people already enrolled in Marketplace coverage: Having a change in income or household status that affects eligibility for premium tax credits or cost-sharing reductions

* Gaining status as member of an Indian tribe. Members of federally recognized Indian tribes can sign up for or change plans once per month throughout the year.
 
Displayed 50 of 210 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report