PDA

View Full Version : Tea Party May Finally Get Its Wish


Rohirrim
09-18-2013, 02:33 PM
That is, to crush the United States government.

The Republican Establishment is trying to coax the crisis-mongers out of their fervor. Today The Wall Street Journal editorial page assails Republicans who insist on shutting down the government unless President Obama agrees to destroy his own health-care reform, a fantastical demand. “Kamikaze missions rarely turn out well, least of all for the pilots,” the Journal warns.

But it’s not as if the House leadership has a more reasonable proposal on offer. In fact, the position of the House leadership is far more radical. GOP leaders are promising their base that if they give up on the Obamacare shutdown fight, they can have an Obamacare debt-ceiling fight. House leaders are dangling before the baying hordes, reports Politico, “tons of conservative goodies: construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, entitlement reform and principles for tax reform.” You can have all this and more!
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/09/obama-republicans-and-the-crisis-of-legitimacy.html

My guess is that if they are successful in shutting down the government, this recession goes into depression.

houghtam
09-18-2013, 03:03 PM
That is, to crush the United States government.

The Republican Establishment is trying to coax the crisis-mongers out of their fervor. Today The Wall Street Journal editorial page assails Republicans who insist on shutting down the government unless President Obama agrees to destroy his own health-care reform, a fantastical demand. “Kamikaze missions rarely turn out well, least of all for the pilots,” the Journal warns.

But it’s not as if the House leadership has a more reasonable proposal on offer. In fact, the position of the House leadership is far more radical. GOP leaders are promising their base that if they give up on the Obamacare shutdown fight, they can have an Obamacare debt-ceiling fight. House leaders are dangling before the baying hordes, reports Politico, “tons of conservative goodies: construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, entitlement reform and principles for tax reform.” You can have all this and more!
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/09/obama-republicans-and-the-crisis-of-legitimacy.html

My guess is that if they are successful in shutting down the government, this recession goes into depression.

Add this to conservatives' shrinking market share (because government is a business to them, you have to use business vocabulary to get their attention) and I don't see how 2014 can be a win.

Unless of course you take away people's right to vote, but these are the Constitution is King (irony!) folks, they'd NEVER do that...right?

Rigs11
09-18-2013, 06:24 PM
USA!USA!GOP!

B-Large
09-18-2013, 07:39 PM
Hard Line supporters will rejoice when the Government shuts down and the US defaults on some obligations...

Until they reap the fallout that brings... Then they will regret it, probably thinking it would have been better to fix their grievances legislatively, like in getting majorities and changing laws, rather than the old dual in the street..

There is a lot wrong with Washington, but popping a wrench in THE financial system cog of the world isn't too bright. Hope they enjoy making a point.

DenverBrit
09-19-2013, 08:41 AM
The GOP has become desperate.

Devoid of ideas, they can think of nothing other than destroy what's left of the economy to make an ideological point.

No negotiating on healthcare, just turn their collective backs on the country while giving us all the finger as they try to shut the country down.

These are the same idiots that call Obama a communist and then embrace Putin. These are Conservatives?? Not even close.

http://www.imradioha.org/maczads-musings/media/Goldwater-1.jpg

Rigs11
09-19-2013, 08:46 AM
Even on their defunding plan they can't agree:clown: idiots, each one of them.


House Republicans question Cruz’s Obamacare-defunding fervor

Washington (CNN) – Republicans in the House of Representatives expressed outrage with one of their compatriots on the other side of the Capitol Wednesday, questioning whether or not Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is really all-in on defunding Obamacare or if he’s trying to put all the onus of defunding the bill on the House.

The House outrage stems directly from a statement from Cruz and fellow GOP stalwarts against Obamacare in the Senate, Marco Rubio and Mike Lee. In it, Cruz said Senate Republicans simply don’t have the votes necessary to keep defunding language in the continuing resolution to fund the government after Oct. 1. Republicans have been attempting to push a bill that would fund the rest of the government while defunding the health care law, a bill Democrats have vowed to fight.


“(Senate Majority Leader) Harry Reid will no doubt try to strip the defund language from the continuing resolution, and right now he likely has the votes to do so,” Cruz said in the statement.

“At that point, House Republicans must stand firm, hold their ground, and continue to listen to the American people. President Obama has already granted Obamacare exemptions to big corporations and Members of Congress; he should not threaten to shut down the government just to deny those same exemptions to hard-working American families.”

The idea that Republicans don’t have the votes to defund Obamacare is not new from Cruz. He’s spent the summer trying to build a “tsunami” of grass-roots outrage against the Affordable Care Act, arguing that such a movement would be the only way to kill President Barack Obama’s signature legislation.

The reaction from House Republicans and senior GOP leadership aides to Cruz’s latest statement on the matter was swift and angry, both about Cruz’s lack of confidence in a vote and his urging of the House to “stand firm.”

“They said nothing is impossible if you fight hard enough, and the minute the House announces the vote, they give up the fight? It's crazy," one senior GOP leadership aide told CNN.

"They should walk the walk," the aide said, predicting it would backfire on the conservative senators.

Another senior GOP leadership aide took a shot at Cruz declining to say whether he would filibuster the bill, telling CNN, "It is disappointing to see that Wendy Davis has more balls than Ted Cruz," in reference to the state senate Democrat who filibustered an abortion bill in the Texas legislature over the summer.

Cruz's Texas GOP colleague, Rep. Blake Farenthold, said he hasn't seen the statement but heard a lot of grumbling from House Republicans on the chamber floor about it Wednesday night.

“We gave them what they asked for; I was more hopeful they would be more positive about it and fight for it," Farenthold said.

Farenthold praised Cruz as one of the most articulate legislators on the Hill and issued a challenge: "I think this a great opportunity for him to go to the Senate floor and win over some votes. Let's see him do the Rand Paul filibuster. He can do it, and I think he'll do a good job," Farenthold said.

The Texas delegation has a regular lunch on Thursdays, and Farenthold said he hopes Cruz shows up tomorrow so they can discuss strategy.

Cruz vowed late Wednesday night on Fox News that he and Sen. Lee "are going to fight with every breath in our body."

"Today I think is a victory for the speaker. And indeed, I would make a plea today to the 46 Senate Republicans that today is the day for party unity that every Senate republican should stand with Republicans in the House, should stand with conservatives and should stand with the American people," he said on Fox's "Hannity."

Lee, who joined Cruz on the show, said after the House passes the bill, it goes to the Senate and at that point, "we have to watch out for a few things."

"First of all, we have to look out for those who will say that once we have had a vote in the House or perhaps once we have had a vote in the Senate that that's it. That's all we need. A vote equals a victory. There is a difference between a vote and a victory," he said.

"And we have to remember that this will not be either won or lost with a single legislative volley from one side of the capitol to the other," he cautioned. "This, like so many other big legislative debates might well take several volleys between House and Senate."

Lee added that he and Cruz "intend" to stand with their House counterparts in trying to defund Obamacare.

Arkansas Republican Rep. Tim Griffin took to Twitter to tweak Cruz, Rubio and Lee, referring to a message from a reporter about the their original statement and tweeting "so far Sen Rs are good at getting Facebook likes, and townhalls, not much else. Do something. . . RT ..."

A spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner was more muted in his response. “We trust that Republicans in the Senate would put up a fight worthy of the challenge Obamacare poses,” Michael Steel said.

Cruz aide Sean Rushton stood up for his boss when asked for comment on the GOP ire. A filibuster of Obamacare still hasn’t been ruled out, Rushton said. “All options are on the table,” he said.

In a statement, Rushton continued, “The ball is in Harry Reid's court. Reid has the votes ONLY IF Republicans don't stand strong. Sen. Cruz will continue working to win the argument with both his colleagues and the American people.”


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/18/house-republicans-question-cruzs-obamacare-defunding-fervor/?hpt=hp_t3

Rohirrim
09-19-2013, 09:02 AM
Constitutional and presidential systems cannot survive without compromise. George Washington said that the foundational principle of our system was "accommodation." The radicals on the Right think they're only going to destroy the other party. Instead, they're going to destroy our form of government and our way of life. Of course, many of them are anarchists, so I doubt they really give a ****.

On the purely pragmatic side of the question, if not Obamacare, what? That's what I don't get. I'm opposed to the program. Always have been. I think it just funnels more hapless Americans into the maw of the insurance industry. I would prefer the Moynihan Solution: Simply remove the age limit from Medicare. Case closed. What I find bizarre is that Obamacare is basically the original Republican program, hatched in the belly of the Heritage Foundation, backed by Bob Dole. Health care costs are the biggest drag on the economy and the future. So, what do the Republicans have to replace Obamacare with? Business as usual? No change? Instead of conducting this Pyrrhic campaign against Obamacare, why aren't they bringing forth their own fix? Why? Because all they've got is destruction. That's why. They know how to bring down. They have no clue how to build up.

Rigs11
09-19-2013, 09:10 AM
NO to healthcare
NO to food stamps
NO to immigration reform
NO to gun control laws
NO to environmental regulations
NO defense cuts

http://www.politifake.org/image/political/1005/the-party-of-no-healthcare-medicare-social-security-political-poster-1272937682.jpg

Rohirrim
09-19-2013, 09:23 AM
NO to healthcare
NO to food stamps
NO to immigration reform
NO to gun control laws
NO to environmental regulations
NO defense cuts

http://www.politifake.org/image/political/1005/the-party-of-no-healthcare-medicare-social-security-political-poster-1272937682.jpg

Their argument is that the debt must be paid down and government must be shrunk to nothing and then all will be well. Really? Austerity has been a total failure elsewhere. http://www.realclearworld.com/2013/07/14/austerity_has_failed_149805.html
And yet, the Right keeps insisting it will work here in the U.S. Why would we be any different? If the government defaults, if our currency defaults, what do you think that will fix? Where will the funds to pay down the debt come from if more people are out of work and they stop spending? Think, people.

BroncoBeavis
09-19-2013, 09:45 AM
Simply remove the age limit from Medicare. Case closed..

You do realize this is infinitely more difficult than you make it sound. Medicare is build to confiscate 'premiums' throughout your life and only pay benefits for a short period at the end.

Pay as you go would require a completely different scale of program. And one where you can no longer utilize current premiums to pay for the non-paying retired.

In short, by definition "Medicare for all" would look absolutely nothing like Medicare. It would have to be a totally separate single-payer system. And "Medicare" would basically only be a trade name.

Rohirrim
09-19-2013, 09:53 AM
You do realize this is infinitely more difficult than you make it sound. Medicare is build to confiscate 'premiums' throughout your life and only pay benefits for a short period at the end.

Pay as you go would require a completely different scale of program. And one where you can no longer utilize current premiums to pay for the non-paying retired.

In short, by definition "Medicare for all" would look absolutely nothing like Medicare. It would have to be a totally separate single-payer system. And "Medicare" would basically only be a trade name.

Exactly. And I'll bet the payment would be less than half of what I'm paying to Blue Cross now for coverage that continues to shrink while copays and deductibles continue to rise.

BroncoBeavis
09-19-2013, 10:06 AM
Exactly. And I'll bet the payment would be less than half of what I'm paying to Blue Cross now for coverage that continues to shrink while copays and deductibles continue to rise.

All depends on how it was structured and how old you are.

With political realities being as they are, over the short term if you're young, you'd probably pay far more. If you're old, probably less.

It's what comes after that would be the real concern though.

But my main point was "Medicare for all" is an empty slogan. Nothing resembling Medicare could work for all (even assuming it works for those forced into it now :) )

Rohirrim
09-19-2013, 10:11 AM
All depends on how it was structured and how old you are.

With political realities being as they are, over the short term if you're young, you'd probably pay far more. If you're old, probably less.

It's what comes after that would be the real concern though.

But my main point was "Medicare for all" is an empty slogan. Nothing resembling Medicare could work for all (even assuming it works for those forced into it now :) )

IMO, just about anything would work better than the gouge-a-palooza we've got going now.

BroncoBeavis
09-19-2013, 10:16 AM
IMO, just about anything would work better than the gouge-a-palooza we've got going now.

I'm not even 100% theoretically opposed to something like that with some hard limits.

Unfortunately once you let politicians in the door, there's no such thing as hard limits. And because of that, price controls and rationing is where it all ends.

Rohirrim
09-19-2013, 10:21 AM
The problem is that the issue of death and "When is enough, enough?" gets brought into the picture. Politics is not the tool to solve philosophical issues. Our whole society has to work that out. Right now, it's worked out by income. If you're rich, you get all the treatment you can afford. If you're poor, you die.

B-Large
09-19-2013, 10:24 AM
Even on their defunding plan they can't agree:clown: idiots, each one of them.


House Republicans question Cruz’s Obamacare-defunding fervor

Washington (CNN) – Republicans in the House of Representatives expressed outrage with one of their compatriots on the other side of the Capitol Wednesday, questioning whether or not Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is really all-in on defunding Obamacare or if he’s trying to put all the onus of defunding the bill on the House.

The House outrage stems directly from a statement from Cruz and fellow GOP stalwarts against Obamacare in the Senate, Marco Rubio and Mike Lee. In it, Cruz said Senate Republicans simply don’t have the votes necessary to keep defunding language in the continuing resolution to fund the government after Oct. 1. Republicans have been attempting to push a bill that would fund the rest of the government while defunding the health care law, a bill Democrats have vowed to fight.


“(Senate Majority Leader) Harry Reid will no doubt try to strip the defund language from the continuing resolution, and right now he likely has the votes to do so,” Cruz said in the statement.

“At that point, House Republicans must stand firm, hold their ground, and continue to listen to the American people. President Obama has already granted Obamacare exemptions to big corporations and Members of Congress; he should not threaten to shut down the government just to deny those same exemptions to hard-working American families.”

The idea that Republicans don’t have the votes to defund Obamacare is not new from Cruz. He’s spent the summer trying to build a “tsunami” of grass-roots outrage against the Affordable Care Act, arguing that such a movement would be the only way to kill President Barack Obama’s signature legislation.

The reaction from House Republicans and senior GOP leadership aides to Cruz’s latest statement on the matter was swift and angry, both about Cruz’s lack of confidence in a vote and his urging of the House to “stand firm.”

“They said nothing is impossible if you fight hard enough, and the minute the House announces the vote, they give up the fight? It's crazy," one senior GOP leadership aide told CNN.

"They should walk the walk," the aide said, predicting it would backfire on the conservative senators.

Another senior GOP leadership aide took a shot at Cruz declining to say whether he would filibuster the bill, telling CNN, "It is disappointing to see that Wendy Davis has more balls than Ted Cruz," in reference to the state senate Democrat who filibustered an abortion bill in the Texas legislature over the summer.

Cruz's Texas GOP colleague, Rep. Blake Farenthold, said he hasn't seen the statement but heard a lot of grumbling from House Republicans on the chamber floor about it Wednesday night.

“We gave them what they asked for; I was more hopeful they would be more positive about it and fight for it," Farenthold said.

Farenthold praised Cruz as one of the most articulate legislators on the Hill and issued a challenge: "I think this a great opportunity for him to go to the Senate floor and win over some votes. Let's see him do the Rand Paul filibuster. He can do it, and I think he'll do a good job," Farenthold said.

The Texas delegation has a regular lunch on Thursdays, and Farenthold said he hopes Cruz shows up tomorrow so they can discuss strategy.

Cruz vowed late Wednesday night on Fox News that he and Sen. Lee "are going to fight with every breath in our body."

"Today I think is a victory for the speaker. And indeed, I would make a plea today to the 46 Senate Republicans that today is the day for party unity that every Senate republican should stand with Republicans in the House, should stand with conservatives and should stand with the American people," he said on Fox's "Hannity."

Lee, who joined Cruz on the show, said after the House passes the bill, it goes to the Senate and at that point, "we have to watch out for a few things."

"First of all, we have to look out for those who will say that once we have had a vote in the House or perhaps once we have had a vote in the Senate that that's it. That's all we need. A vote equals a victory. There is a difference between a vote and a victory," he said.

"And we have to remember that this will not be either won or lost with a single legislative volley from one side of the capitol to the other," he cautioned. "This, like so many other big legislative debates might well take several volleys between House and Senate."

Lee added that he and Cruz "intend" to stand with their House counterparts in trying to defund Obamacare.

Arkansas Republican Rep. Tim Griffin took to Twitter to tweak Cruz, Rubio and Lee, referring to a message from a reporter about the their original statement and tweeting "so far Sen Rs are good at getting Facebook likes, and townhalls, not much else. Do something. . . RT ..."

A spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner was more muted in his response. “We trust that Republicans in the Senate would put up a fight worthy of the challenge Obamacare poses,” Michael Steel said.

Cruz aide Sean Rushton stood up for his boss when asked for comment on the GOP ire. A filibuster of Obamacare still hasn’t been ruled out, Rushton said. “All options are on the table,” he said.

In a statement, Rushton continued, “The ball is in Harry Reid's court. Reid has the votes ONLY IF Republicans don't stand strong. Sen. Cruz will continue working to win the argument with both his colleagues and the American people.”


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/18/house-republicans-question-cruzs-obamacare-defunding-fervor/?hpt=hp_t3

Cruz is no dummy, the Defund effort is dead in the Senate. He has rallied up the base and sprung himself into the Nation Conversation of 2016, and he has mainly done that on defund/repeal/delay the ACA... Voters will remember him as the rebel rouser on the issue, but now, he needs to pivot to a different strategy... "we simply cannot kill the ACA unless we win the White House, and turn the Senate, and that is what were going to do!"- its coming, and its not surprise.

The Debt Ceiling and CR effort is a losing battle for R's, its hurts a 16T economy just to spite a 800B bill over 10 years.... and with single digits approval ratings, they don't have the politcal capital to pin this on Democrats... they hold the purse strings, Democrats will lambaste R for not paying Bills and they know it.

Truth be told, I love the drama.

BroncoBeavis
09-19-2013, 10:25 AM
The problem is that the issue of death and "When is enough, enough?" gets brought into the picture. Politics is not the tool to solve philosophical issues. Our whole society has to work that out.

That is a problem. But the reason that problem is such a roadblock is that the politicizers like to think they can arrive at the answer by decree.

And the sad fact of the matter is, resources are always a major factor. Warren Buffett will always have access to medical resources you or I don't. Is that necessarily fair? Probably not. But it is. And you can't legislate it away.

A certain part of society wants to say "Money shouldn't buy you better care"

But it will. It always will. Any solution that can't see that fundamental truth is self-defeating.

Rohirrim
09-19-2013, 10:29 AM
Cruz is no dummy, the Defund effort is dead in the Senate. He has rallied up the base and sprung himself into the Nation Conversation of 2016, and he has mainly done that on defund/repeal/delay the ACA... Voters will remember him as the rebel rouser on the issue, but now, he needs to pivot to a different strategy... "we simply cannot kill the ACA unless we win the White House, and turn the Senate, and that is what were going to do!"- its coming, and its not surprise.

The Debt Ceiling and CR effort is a losing battle for R's, its hurts a 16T economy just to spite a 800B bill over 10 years.... and with single digits approval ratings, they don't have the politcal capital to pin this on Democrats... they hold the purse strings, Democrats will lambaste R for not paying Bills and they know it.

Truth be told, I love the drama.

Like many a historian has pointed out, you can't rule the country from the House. Ask Gingrich.

B-Large
09-19-2013, 10:32 AM
You do realize this is infinitely more difficult than you make it sound. Medicare is build to confiscate 'premiums' throughout your life and only pay benefits for a short period at the end.

Pay as you go would require a completely different scale of program. And one where you can no longer utilize current premiums to pay for the non-paying retired.

In short, by definition "Medicare for all" would look absolutely nothing like Medicare. It would have to be a totally separate single-payer system. And "Medicare" would basically only be a trade name.

sigh.

Medicare recipient pay premiums for Medicare every year until the die right? Also, Part B requires a 20% coninsurance, right?

also, do you know why Medicare is law in the first place? because insurance companies lose money on old people, and lawmakers decided we will not give up on old people because they are a higher acturarial risk than young people. Government covered elederly because nobody else would.

B-Large
09-19-2013, 10:33 AM
Like many a historian has pointed out, you can't rule the country from the House. Ask Gingrich.

We have winner. Newt understand whats going on, I am sure he and fellow senior GOPers laugh behind the scenes at the new guys with whiskey and a cigar in hand...

Rohirrim
09-19-2013, 10:43 AM
That is a problem. But the reason that problem is such a roadblock is that the politicizers like to think they can arrive at the answer by decree.

And the sad fact of the matter is, resources are always a major factor. Warren Buffett will always have access to medical resources you or I don't. Is that necessarily fair? Probably not. But it is. And you can't legislate it away.

A certain part of society wants to say "Money shouldn't buy you better care"

But it will. It always will. Any solution that can't see that fundamental truth is self-defeating.

But it's not an all-or-nothing arena. Sure, there will always be rich people. So, should there be people who are millions of times richer than everybody else while others have nothing? Can there be people who are thousands of times richer while those at the bottom have a sustainable existence? Can the rich have luxurious health care while the poor have acceptable health care? Like Lincoln said, labor comes first. There is no capital without labor. Why should the share of labor be less than what is required to have a sustainable life while capital skims the cream from the top?

IMO, it's because man is locked into a feudal default. No matter what system you impose or create, man will revert to a hierarchical system. He just seems more comfortable with that. It's hard-wired. On the primate brain level.

Well, that and the fact that the greedy never rest in the pursuit of MORE.

BroncoBeavis
09-19-2013, 10:52 AM
sigh.

Medicare recipient pay premiums for Medicare every year until the die right? Also, Part B requires a 20% coninsurance, right?

Regular Medicare (A) is funded by a payroll tax. Not really a 'premium' If you retire, essentially you don't pay anything for Medicare anymore. But you're still covered, regardless.

also, do you know why Medicare is law in the first place? because insurance companies lose money on old people, and lawmakers decided we will not give up on old people because they are a higher acturarial risk than young people. Government covered elederly because nobody else would.

Insurance or no doesn't really matter. There was insurance available. Just not at a price everyone could afford. The baseline reality behind this was some people couldn't afford to pay for the care that they needed/wanted when they were old. The same baseline truth we have today. (And will always have)

The solution was Medicare, which gave them "coverage" they never paid for. It was a Ponzi ploy that still goes on to this day, and whose day of reckoning is fast approaching. Any private insurance that existed for the elderly could no longer function under this kind of market. Because private insurers don't have the ability to collect premiums for old people from 25 year old workers by force (as does the federal government)

BroncoBeavis
09-19-2013, 10:58 AM
But it's not an all-or-nothing arena. Sure, there will always be rich people. So, should there be people who are millions of times richer than everybody else while others have nothing? Can there be people who are thousands of times richer while those at the bottom have a sustainable existence? Can the rich have luxurious health care while the poor have acceptable health care? Like Lincoln said, labor comes first. There is no capital without labor. Why should the share of labor be less than what is required to have a sustainable life while capital skims the cream from the top?

I agree with the premise, in basic principle. And this gets to why I mentioned hard limits. I'm not automatically opposed to a baseline level of coverage under a universal system. But in reality what happens is that baseline is a fictional construct.

What happens when that baseline doesn't cover the $10 million dollar procedure Uncle Warren just had done at a private facility, from a doctor who doesn't accept "Medicare for all"

Suddenly there's a politician grabbing headlines. And he wants all doctors to take only Uncle Sam insurance. And get paid whatever a panel of trial lawyers deems fair.

Rohirrim
09-19-2013, 11:00 AM
Regular Medicare (A) is funded by a payroll tax. Not really a 'premium' If you retire, essentially you don't pay anything for Medicare anymore. But you're still covered, regardless.



Insurance or no doesn't really matter. There was insurance available. Just not at a price everyone could afford. The baseline reality behind this was some people couldn't afford to pay for the care that they needed/wanted when they were old. The same baseline truth we have today. (And will always have)

The solution was Medicare, which gave them "coverage" they never paid for. It was a Ponzi ploy that still goes on to this day, and whose day of reckoning is fast approaching. Any private insurance that existed for the elderly could no longer function under this kind of market. Because private insurers don't have the ability to collect premiums for old people from 25 year old workers by force (as does the federal government)

So, the poor will always be with us: Let em die? The Dickensian is strong with this one. ;D

Rohirrim
09-19-2013, 11:02 AM
I agree with the premise, in basic principle. And this gets to why I mentioned hard limits. I'm not automatically opposed to a baseline level of coverage under a universal system. But in reality what happens is that baseline is a fictional construct.

What happens when that baseline doesn't cover the $10 million dollar procedure Uncle Warren just had done at a private facility, from a doctor who doesn't accept "Medicare for all"

Suddenly there's a politician grabbing headlines. And he wants all doctors to take only Uncle Sam insurance. And get paid whatever a panel of trial lawyers deems fair.

I worked in the field for quite a while. In the scenario you propose, a bankruptcy attorney works it out. So, either way, attorneys.

houghtam
09-19-2013, 11:03 AM
Sounds an awful (emphasize awful) lot like Beavis.

LOL

TonyR
09-19-2013, 12:06 PM
If there were no money involved, I’d call this a misguided bid for relevance. As it stands, the effort to defund Obamacare is a lucrative business. Which is why it continues to go forward, even as the odds for success dip to the quantum level. For the lawmakers and groups spearheading this movement, Tea Party voters aren’t dedicated citizens as much as they are gullible customers; ripe targets for their brand commercialized outrage. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/18/the-obamacare-swindle-it-s-not-what-you-think.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+thedailybeast%2Flatest+%28The +Daily+Beast+-+Latest%29

TonyR
09-19-2013, 12:07 PM
Some annoyed Republicans are accusing shutdown-pushers like Ted Cruz of “not dealing in reality,” but Cruz is decidedly reality-based. He’s just selling unreality to his constituents — not just Texas voters, but the entire nationwide network of pissed-off and increasingly delusional conservatives who fund the great right-wing money carousel. He becomes a star, and they get to feel like they’re an integral part of an existential fight for America’s future. http://www.salon.com/2013/09/17/for_conservatives_the_obamacare_fight_is_great_for _business/

BroncoBeavis
09-19-2013, 12:27 PM
I worked in the field for quite a while. In the scenario you propose, a bankruptcy attorney works it out. So, either way, attorneys.

New paradigm now though. You wait on a list. And maybe die on it. No attorneys allowed.

Unless you have the $$$ to hop the system. But then you're right back at Square 1. Money buys care.

BroncoBeavis
09-19-2013, 12:31 PM
Sounds an awful (emphasize awful) lot like Beavis.

LOL

Hey, great work, Columbo. I knew they kept you around for something. LOL

Rohirrim
09-19-2013, 02:25 PM
http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/socialism-big-lebowski-ethos.gif

houghtam
09-19-2013, 02:28 PM
http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/socialism-big-lebowski-ethos.gif

LOL

BEAVIS YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT!

BroncoBeavis
09-19-2013, 02:42 PM
Hammurabi had an ethos. As did Classical Liberalism.

What does that mean? Not much, really.

Roh, all you have to tell me is that it's ok for Bill Gates to get better health care than you do. That it would be wrong to try to force his doctor to see you too. And I think we could come to an agreement. :)

Rohirrim
09-19-2013, 03:15 PM
Hammurabi had an ethos. As did Classical Liberalism.

What does that mean? Not much, really.

Roh, all you have to tell me is that it's ok for Bill Gates to get better health care than you do. That it would be wrong to try to force his doctor to see you too. And I think we could come to an agreement. :)

That's not the point. The question is, in modern society is health care a right or a commodity?

Meck77
09-19-2013, 03:29 PM
Tearing things down sounds like a good idea. We've been propping up bad business with all the bailouts and QE for far too long. How many years do you keep doing the same thing over and over. By definition that is insanity. What's wrong with living within our means or the current debt ceiling?

BroncoBeavis
09-19-2013, 03:34 PM
That's not the point. The question is, in modern society is health care a right or a commodity?

That's a gross oversimplification. Healthcare is not an all or nothing proposition. Some people could afford to spend $100 million dollars for an extra year of life. Society cannot afford that on your behalf, however.

So the question becomes what's better... dollars making decisions? Or a bureaucracy making decisions, with enough dollars still being able to override the bureaucracy.

houghtam
09-19-2013, 04:54 PM
What's wrong with living within our means or the current debt ceiling?

For as smart as you like to sound, you apparently cannot comprehend very basic ideas.

Once the money gets spent, as it already has been, you can't THEN go "oops we have a budget and our bills are bigger than the budget, soooo **** THE BILLS!"

How is this so hard to grasp for someone who was purportedly a business owner at the age of 10?

Fedaykin
09-19-2013, 08:13 PM
For as smart as you like to sound, you apparently cannot comprehend very basic ideas.

Once the money gets spent, as it already has been, you can't THEN go "oops we have a budget and our bills are bigger than the budget, soooo **** THE BILLS!"

How is this so hard to grasp for someone who was purportedly a business owner at the age of 10?

Nah man, when I had some rough times I told my mortgage lender I was going to not raise my debt limit and instead stop paying my mortgage. They were like 'that's cool man, you're doing the right thing and not spending more money!'

True Story

houghtam
09-19-2013, 10:39 PM
Nah man, when I had some rough times I told my mortgage lender I was going to not raise my debt limit and instead stop paying my mortgage. They were like 'that's cool man, you're doing the right thing and not spending more money!'

True Story

I wonder if the same logic applies to his rental properties.

"Sorry, we spent too much on groceries and other necessities this month, rent just isn't in the cards. But hey! We voted as a family to not pay your rent, soooooo... Democracy!"