RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it"

RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

mnottertail -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/25/2017 2:57:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nnanji quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: ORIGINAL: Nnanji quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: ORIGINAL: Nnanji quote: ORIGINAL: MakeM3Urs Adopt the French system that takes half your income in taxes, but provides for all healthcare costs and retirement benefits. With income tax, State tax, property tax, sales tax and on and on, they already do take half. Well, looking as you do from a perspective of moral relativism, I wouldn't expect you to understand. Keep your eye on that voice mental patient. It's probably the stupidest thing you've said in a while. I won't even try to explain the idiocy. That voice is not your friend. You are the feclgobbling nutsucker who retardedly cast yourself as a moral relativist when you meant mentally deficient toiletlicker, wilbur. Actually no. That was sarcasm for the morally deficient leftist. If one or two of your other voices had been paying attention mental patient, I'm sure you would have caught that. I know you would have. That's why I said it was stupid. Obviously you were a couple of voices down. How about morally deficient nutsuckers and felchgobblers, or do you want to be amoral and deficient felchgobblers, retard? You need to tweak your voices and your retardation, you are more unintelligible than your hero Felchgobbler Gobbles, shitbreather 3rd class wilbur. I never deal in sarcasm or its lesser cousin, irony. I deal only in the highest plane of sardonic, and I see as a retard you have completely missed it, with your lack of intellect.

mnottertail -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/25/2017 3:01:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nnanji quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: Nnanji quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: Nnanji quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: BoscoX It is immoral, for many reasons You have to take the money away from someone to do it, that's stealing. Government is notoriously corrupt and inefficient, so it is wasteful. Politicians use taxpayer money to buy votes with such programs, so motivations are very often impure For the same reasons you can't provide people with everything you need as I suggested above, it is cruel to get people hooked and dependent on government handouts, especially when government may not always be there. Our current debt is unsustainable and something's got to give money isnt "moral" From a morally relativistic position that's nonsense, yet I don't expect you to understand. As you are a conservative american talking about moral relativism HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAHHAAHAHAHAHAH Absolutely. Using sarcasm to point out the idiocy of you discussing morals. I do notice the other sock already made the same mistaken comment. ANd I pointed out you have no place to come from regarding knowledge or morality. that wasnt sarcasm, you thought it meant something But...how would you know? Oh...mind reading. Nope, you are prima facie retard. You dont have a mind, you have a crippled syphilitic mass where your brain stem ends at the entrance to the void that is your cranial vault, you know, where your voices echo in there with the empty gum wrappers and cigarette butts blowing around.

TheUltimate4Him -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/25/2017 3:48:40 AM)
His is an active thread so unsure if this has also been said above. Insurance companies have created contracts with physicians and so, even recently, when I had a root canal and crown, The insurance company was charged by the dentist $763 when, if I didn't have insurance I would have been directly charged $500. So this practice of cracking over the coals the people who can pay for insurance to make up the difference of those who don't, has got to stop. I'm not interested in being charged inflated prices to pay for others, especially illegals who run to the emergency room when they have a cold. Or the county medical clinic which I pay for with higher taxes. If we stopped all services and benefits, medical, housing, food, education to anyone who couldn't prove they were a citizen of this country, things would be a lot better. Then we could pay for our own citizens who needed treatment and were disabled.

Lucylastic -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/25/2017 3:57:54 AM)
I'm not interested in being charged inflated prices to pay for others, Thats what insurance is.... Half the country are women which means half of them(roughly) will need gynae care at some point in their life, your mother did, your aunts did, your grandmother did, your sister did, your daughhters and nieces will too. Im guessing by your nick that you are female. ASnd you wanna blame illegals for making insurance higher? Yanno if their bill had passed, 24 million more people would be using the emergency roooms You wanna blame illegals, thats pathetic.

thompsonx -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/25/2017 4:21:11 AM)
ORIGINAL: bounty44 in the former then the question becomes how best to obtain healthcare and so i'll say it again, in principle, the free market produces the best product for the least amount of dollars. Cite please

thompsonx -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/25/2017 4:49:50 AM)
ORIGINAL: dcnovice Two personal notes from someone with a fair bit of experience with U.S. healthcare: (a) Today, I had to reschedule a much-needed CT scan at a (nongovernmental) hospital because my (nongovernmental) insurance company is still conducting "medical review" to decide if I need what my doctor prescribed. The review, I learned, can take 2-15 (!!) days. How, exactly, would that differ from a 'death pannel'?

thompsonx -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/25/2017 4:56:33 AM)
ORIGINAL: BoscoX And food, and housing, nice clothes, high speed Internet, public utilities, transportation, hair care professionals, mad money, pets... If "we the people" say so then it is so. If you do not like that then get the phoque out of my country Everything that Chairman Mao promised, and more Cite please

thompsonx -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/25/2017 4:58:08 AM)
ORIGINAL: bounty44 the other, despite the lefties who read way too much into too little of our constitution, people don't have a "right" to healthcare. "The people" have a right to what ever "the people" say they do. That is the nature of the government the founders created. If you do not like that then get the phoque out of my country.

thompsonx -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/25/2017 4:59:35 AM)
ORIGINAL: bounty44 almost anything that doesn't emphasize movement towards a free market is a non-starter for me. Why would you be in favor of a 'free market' approach to the dod or the doj? I haven't followed closely enough to say for sure but I suspect that's the freedom caucus folks' main objection too. Why do you comment on that which you claim ignorance?

thompsonx -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/25/2017 5:00:41 AM)
ORIGINAL: BoscoX It is immoral, for many reasons Since you are infavor of making decissions on what is moral then please explane what is moral about allowing our poorest and weakest to die? You have to take the money away from someone to do it, that's stealing. The tax man 'steals' your money to support the military. Government is notoriously corrupt and inefficient, They are elected by you and people like you thus it would follow that you and people like you are notoriously corrupt and inefficient. so it is wasteful. Politicians use taxpayer money to buy votes with such programs, so motivations are very often impure So once again it would follow that those impure politicians were elected by those like you who are also, by definition, impure For the same reasons you can't provide people with everything you need as I suggested above, it is cruel to get people hooked and dependent on government handouts, especially when government may not always be there. Our current debt is unsustainable and something's got to give Perhaps you should give more since you feel it would be moral to do so.

kdsub -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/26/2017 7:59:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 almost anything that doesn't emphasize movement towards a free market is a non-starter for me. I haven't followed closely enough to say for sure but I suspect that's the freedom caucus folks' main objection too. anything with the government involved is going to be Obamacare-lite. unfortunately, once you "give" something to someone, no matter even if its bad, taking it back is a challenge. Yes it is bad to help the aged and poor to receive decent healthcare. Hell all it would take is a 1 percent GDP drop in defense spending for us and our allies paying their agreed but never matched share and we could all have good reasonable priced if not free healthcare. Or lets pay a few more dollars each in taxes to help those less fortunate... oh wait I forgot Christians are not supposed to help the sick and poor...they are to say fuck them freeloaders. Butch

bounty44 -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/27/2017 3:52:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 almost anything that doesn't emphasize movement towards a free market is a non-starter for me. I haven't followed closely enough to say for sure but I suspect that's the freedom caucus folks' main objection too. anything with the government involved is going to be Obamacare-lite. unfortunately, once you "give" something to someone, no matter even if its bad, taking it back is a challenge. Yes it is bad to help the aged and poor to receive decent healthcare. Hell all it would take is a 1 percent GDP drop in defense spending for us and our allies paying their agreed but never matched share and we could all have good reasonable priced if not free healthcare. Or lets pay a few more dollars each in taxes to help those less fortunate... oh wait I forgot Christians are not supposed to help the sick and poor...they are to say fuck them freeloaders. Butch its really difficult to be gentle in response when someone seemingly willfully distorts the positions held by the other side, especially when that very issue has been addressed not only in multiple threads since ive been here, but in this very thread itself. and i'll just leave it at that and hope you are wise enough to see what a fool you just were---or maybe are?

mnottertail -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/27/2017 5:37:19 AM)
The nutsuckers were trying to slash the shit out of and dump medicaid about as xtian a group of nutsuckers as could be expected. Ah the free-market communism. I often cant get to work on time because of the lines in the streets for all the abjectly impoverished trying to get in for the efficiently priced and marketed tummy tucks, we need to bring that to general healthcare, for the cancers and the heart attacks, and diabetes, it is so bleedin obvious now that the retards have revealed it to us, innit? Who would have thought that such a simpletonian nutsuckerism could be so xtian and patriotic at the same instant? Why didn't we see these apples and oranges melding before in their purity, simplicity, efficacy and nutsuckerism?

bounty44 -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/27/2017 9:28:41 AM)
"Speaker Paul Ryan: You’re Fired" quote: The AHCA was DOA on the First Day. Why? It wasn’t repeal—and then the bill was pushed on a premise of “replace.” Obamacare does not need to be replaced, either. Government intervention is not needed. If I go to the doctor, I do not want Big Mamma Government telling me to turn my head and cough. This whole “AHCA Y—M-C-A!” (with apologies to the Village People!) has been an overwrought snake oil scam. This Obamacare debacle is already dead, from the moment that the Democratic hordes forced it onto us, and Grandma Pelosi announcing: “We had to pass the bill so that you can see what’s it in.” Worse has transpired. We have experienced what it’s done to the economy, the insurance industry, and our health care systems. • Businesses cut hours, laid off workers, or never expanded. • Medical staffers (from doctors down to the nurses’ aides) are fleeing the profession. • Hospitals are closing. • Local clinics are shutting down, not because of the lack of patient demand, but because the number of qualified professionals has plummeted. The paperwork, the bureaucratese, the lack of reimbursements, the stellar invasion of Washington DC into rural and Main Street doctors’ offices have turned the health care profession into a nightmare. Oh, and waiting times have increased by at least 30%, per the latest study. [but this is all okay, because democrats really care and the evil republicans (and Christians too!) don't] No Obamacare replacement was ever needed. A full repeal is just what the doctor ordered. Were Republicans trying too hard or going to fast? No. The same corporate interests which have pulled strings, written checks, and cornered elected officials were back in business... With right and wrong, there is no room for compromise. Do I want a little poison in my cereal, as opposed to a lot? Whether a little or a lot, it will kill me. No compromises, no half-way consequences... https://townhall.com/columnists/arthurschaper/2017/03/27/speaker-paul-ryan-youre-fired-n2304542

bounty44 -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/27/2017 9:44:24 AM)
"What Does a “Free Market” in Health Care Look Like? Here’s an Example" quote: Conservatives often talk about the importance of a free market to improve health care quality and lower costs. What would it look like? An example could be found in the development of LASIK surgery. Dr. Craig Beyer, a practicing ophthalmologist and LASIK surgeon, was part of the team that performed the world’s first laser vision correction procedure and was one of the first to perform experimental LASIK surgery in 1988. Since then, he’s seen the quality of LASIK improve without the price dramatically increasing. He says this is because ophthalmology functions like the free market. [whaaaaat? better quality without a commensurate increase in cost? damn that free market!] “LASIK is a transparent procedure,” Beyer said. “You don’t have the layers and layers of bureaucracy that a third-party payment system requires.” Beyer said his patients know exactly what they want and what it should cost. The free-market system allows for competition and allows people to shop around to make sure they get the surgeon and experience they want. Beyer’s positive experience in the LASIK industry helps frame his arguments against Obamacare — a system he feels is “dysfunctional.” He fears Obamacare will harm the doctor-patient relationship and decrease the incentive for quality health care. People will go to the doctor and be treated like a number because physicians will only be thinking, “What diagnosis code fits this patient, and how do I get paid for it?” Beyer said. [what does he know though, he's just a doctor--probably a Christian republican too!] He’s also concerned that Obamacare’s massive price control and administrative costs are too much like the current Medicare system. “How could anyone completely ignore the massive financial problems within the current unsustainable Medicare system only to create another much larger health program with all the same features?” Beyer said. Indeed, as Heritage expert Alyene Senger has explained: quote: Third-party payment arrangements are already compromising the independence and integrity of the medical profession, and Obamacare reinforces the worst of these features. Specifically, physicians will be subject to more government regulation and oversight, and will be increasingly dependent on unreliable government reimbursement for medical services. The enactment of Obamacare inspired Beyer to write Heaven or Health in 2012, a book about his ideas on a health care system that is transparent and allows for competition and quality. He also posts regularly on Doctors Against Obamacare, the advocacy page he started on Facebook to collect stories and information about the harmful effects of Obamacare. ["doctors against obamacare??" oh they must be purely motivated by greed and not a desire to do what's best for patients!] “It’s our lives,” Beyer stressed. “Do we really want to delegate the care of our lives to self-interested third parties and bureaucratic decision makers?” Our experts in the Center for Health Policy Studies have put together a conservative alternative to Obamacare that explains how a free-market health care system can work. It’s a plan designed to put patients and their quality of care first. http://dailysignal.com/2013/11/12/what-does-a-free-market-in-health-care-look-like-heres-an-example/

mnottertail -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/27/2017 9:45:48 AM)
And of course the nutsucker slobberblogs give us the credible realistic picture with actual data and a causal relationship • Businesses cut hours, laid off workers, or never expanded. (not attributable to healthcare) • Medical staffers (from doctors down to the nurses’ aides) are fleeing the profession. (geeze I missed these stats and so did everyone else) • Hospitals are closing. (More and more we have players being run out of the 'free market' as a few big corporations continue to corner the market) • Local clinics are shutting down, not because of the lack of patient demand, but because the number of qualified professionals has plummeted. (here we all thought that it was defunding of planned parenthood, cuts to health and human services and other such nutsuckerism.) https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_stru.htm#31-0000 Health care employment rose by 27,000 in February, with a job gain in ambulatory health care services (+18,000). Over the year, health care has added an average of 30,000 jobs per month. E unum pluribus for nutsucker factlessness. Oh no comrade nutsuckers!!!! Factless townhall!!!!!

bounty44 -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/27/2017 9:48:48 AM)
fellllllllllllllllllllllllch gobble!

mnottertail -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/27/2017 9:55:26 AM)
Thats you in a nutshell, dogshit44, you are one of the premier felchgobblers of factless townhall in the nation. Good rallying cry you got there for your circlefelch coven.

Lucylastic -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/27/2017 11:06:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 "Speaker Paul Ryan: You’re Fired" quote: The AHCA was DOA on the First Day. Why? It wasn’t repeal—and then the bill was pushed on a premise of “replace.” Obamacare does not need to be replaced, either. Government intervention is not needed. If I go to the doctor, I do not want Big Mamma Government telling me to turn my head and cough. This whole “AHCA Y—M-C-A!” (with apologies to the Village People!) has been an overwrought snake oil scam. This Obamacare debacle is already dead, from the moment that the Democratic hordes forced it onto us, and Grandma Pelosi announcing: “We had to pass the bill so that you can see what’s it in.” Worse has transpired. We have experienced what it’s done to the economy, the insurance industry, and our health care systems. • Businesses cut hours, laid off workers, or never expanded. • Medical staffers (from doctors down to the nurses’ aides) are fleeing the profession. • Hospitals are closing. • Local clinics are shutting down, not because of the lack of patient demand, but because the number of qualified professionals has plummeted. The paperwork, the bureaucratese, the lack of reimbursements, the stellar invasion of Washington DC into rural and Main Street doctors’ offices have turned the health care profession into a nightmare. Oh, and waiting times have increased by at least 30%, per the latest study. [but this is all okay, because democrats really care and the evil republicans (and Christians too!) don't] No Obamacare replacement was ever needed. A full repeal is just what the doctor ordered. Were Republicans trying too hard or going to fast? No. The same corporate interests which have pulled strings, written checks, and cornered elected officials were back in business... With right and wrong, there is no room for compromise. Do I want a little poison in my cereal, as opposed to a lot? Whether a little or a lot, it will kill me. No compromises, no half-way consequences... https://townhall.com/columnists/arthurschaper/2017/03/27/speaker-paul-ryan-youre-fired-n2304542 Oh Townhall finally got their fingers out and posted Bountys talking points.

kdsub -> RE: ..."arch-conservatives rejected it" (3/27/2017 7:25:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 almost anything that doesn't emphasize movement towards a free market is a non-starter for me. I haven't followed closely enough to say for sure but I suspect that's the freedom caucus folks' main objection too. anything with the government involved is going to be Obamacare-lite. unfortunately, once you "give" something to someone, no matter even if its bad, taking it back is a challenge. Yes it is bad to help the aged and poor to receive decent healthcare. Hell all it would take is a 1 percent GDP drop in defense spending for us and our allies paying their agreed but never matched share and we could all have good reasonable priced if not free healthcare. Or lets pay a few more dollars each in taxes to help those less fortunate... oh wait I forgot Christians are not supposed to help the sick and poor...they are to say fuck them freeloaders. Butch its really difficult to be gentle in response when someone seemingly willfully distorts the positions held by the other side, especially when that very issue has been addressed not only in multiple threads since ive been here, but in this very thread itself. and i'll just leave it at that and hope you are wise enough to see what a fool you just were---or maybe are? There is no distortion here... Just reality to the poor and aged that will lose their healthcare and perhaps their lives. There is no excuse for Americans to abandon, for the sake of a "free market", those that cannot afford basic healthcare for themselves and their children. Shame on you and your like. Butch

Page: << < prev 5 6 7 [8] 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625