• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

The American Politics Discussion Thread

KingCharizard

C++ Developer Extraordinaire
1,229
Posts
14
Years
Zet said:
You're right, what were people thinking?! They can just walk off the deadly deadly sickness and die instead of going to see a Doctor. :D
Click to expand...
Where exactly did I say that hoesntly your just defecting my point with failed sarcasm, so I will try to nsil my point into your thick skill again.

If people need to see a doctor there is insurance, if they don't want to see a doctor that is their choice. I dont like hospitals so I dont go, if I get sick and I die I die, that is my choice. I refuse to pay for something I dont want or need. Everyone else can get insurance, goto the doctor hell for all I care they can see the pope for prayers I dont care. They point is if they want to see a doctor they can, if they dont they dont have to...

if you are arguing you cannot afford the insurance because your poor, then do something about that. I grew u poor I went to school worked hard now I live a comfortable life, not rich or anything but I meet my expenses with some left to splurge
 
Last edited:

Oryx

CoquettishCat
13,184
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Jan 30, 2015
KingCharizard said:
Where exactly did I say that hoesntly your just defecting my point with failed sarcasm, so I will try to nsil my point into your thick skill again.

If people need to see a doctor their is insurance, if they don't want to see a doctor that is their choice. I dont like hospitals so I dont go, if I get sick and I die I die, that is my choice. I refuse to pay for something I dont want or need. Everyone else can get insurance, goto the doctor hell for all I care they can see the pope for prayers I dont care. They point is if they want to see a doctor they can, if they dont they dont have to...
Click to expand...

Didn't we just have this discussion? Where I said "not everyone can afford insurance" and you said "what about medicare" and I explained about people that have enough money to not be on Medicare but couldn't afford insurance because of a pre-existing condition or just high rates and you asked how Obamacare would be paid for and I gave you a link that listed all the ways and then you stopped replying? Why are you making the same point again? Just go re-read the conversation from yesterday on that.

Off-topic: Please spell check! A few typos is fine but 'nsil' is a complete bastardization of what I assume to be instill. That's to the point where it takes honest effort to decipher your words and how your 'creative liberties' with spelling destroyed them past recognition.
 
Last edited:

KingCharizard

C++ Developer Extraordinaire
1,229
Posts
14
Years
Toujours said:
Didn't we just have this discussion? Where I said "not everyone can afford insurance" and you said "what about medicare" and I explained about people that have enough money to not be on Medicare but couldn't afford insurance because of a pre-existing condition or just high rates and you asked how Obamacare would be paid for and I gave you a link that listed all the ways and then you stopped replying? Why are you making the same point again? Just go re-read the conversation from yesterday on that.

Off-topic: Please spell check! A few typos is fine but 'nsil' is a complete bastardization of what I assume to be instill. That's to the point where it takes honest effort to decipher your words and how your 'creative liberties' with spelling destroyed them past recognition.
Click to expand...

nail* i hit s instead of a.... I'm making my point because the person I quoted doesn't seem to get it. I stopped replying because there is something us humans do is sleep. I didn't see anywhere in that link you posted where it said how they would pay for it, just what it was then again i didnt read much because I didn't feel like it.
 

Oryx

CoquettishCat
13,184
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Jan 30, 2015
That is the text of the bill. If you don't feel like reading the text of the bill under Title IX like I told you, then you really can't argue about how Obamacare will be paid for. I gave you the information, either you can choose to stay ignorant (in that case you'd logically stop arguing since you choose not to know about it) or you can choose to educate yourself and have an educated debate on the pros and cons of it.
 
Esper

Esper

10,769
Posts
14
Years
Rodriguezjames55 said:
we need health care reform not government mandates we should have it the way Gary Johnson says free market health care and for those with preexisting conditions STATE health care
Click to expand...
But everyone is going to have a preexisting condition at some point in their lives. Seriously, if you've ever gone to the doctor for anything other than a checkup (or if your doctor found something during a checkup) you've got something on your medical records. It's kind of like if everyone who drove a car had accidents all the time. The "free market" insurance companies would keep raising costs on you. No one could afford that and everyone would just go to the government for help eventually.
 
Mr. X

Mr. X

It's... kinda effective?
2,391
Posts
17
Years
Rodriguezjames55 said:
we need health care reform not government mandates we should have it the way Gary Johnson says free market health care and for those with preexisting conditions STATE health care
Click to expand...

Some insurance companies would have jacked up a person rates, or deny them outright, if they had acne in the past, or were pregnant in the past.

Its idiocy like this that made governmental intervention necessary.

Edit - I was born premature and had messed up lungs. Before Obamacare, even though that my lungs have since healed, I would have been denied coverage because of this.
 

Oryx

CoquettishCat
13,184
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Jan 30, 2015
Gary Johnson is for state healthcare in some cases? That sounds anti-libertarian to me. o_O
 

FreakyLocz14

Conservative Patriot
3,498
Posts
14
Years
  • Seen Aug 29, 2018
Toujours said:
But don't you believe that we should be free to live whatever lifestyles we want? Isn't that the libertarian way? Besides, England's rate of obesity is near ours and they have universal healthcare.
Click to expand...

That's why I said that health care is ultimately personal responsibility. It's not the government's job, or even a private doctor's job to make all of your health decisions. It's up to you and I to make healthy choices. Don't expect others to take care of you when you decided to eat Big Macs 5 times a week and not exercise.

England's NHS is also going bankrupt (source) as a result. If the government is providing health care, yet the people's lifestyles are inherently unhealthy, then the health care system is for naught.
 

TRIFORCE89

Guide of Darkness
8,123
Posts
19
Years
FreakyLocz14 said:
That's why I said that health care is ultimately personal responsibility. It's not the government's job, or even a private doctor's job to make all of your health decisions. It's up to you and I to make healthy choices. Don't expect others to take care of you when you decided to eat Big Macs 5 times a week and not exercise.
Click to expand...
No one expects to be taken care of. Particularly by the government. They do hope to be able to see a doctor without losing their house though.

And not everyone dies from Big Macs. People get seriously ill. People have accidents

We have universal health care here in Canada. Health care is not provided by or performed by the government. Doctors and their practices are private entities. What the government provides here is just a baseline level of health insurance. We still need to buy private health insurance. We still need to rely on drug plans from our employers. What the government plan does though is enable you to see a doctor when you think you need it. You don't need to wait if you can't afford it. Waiting makes things worse. Preventive care, which in the long run is less of a burden on the government.

And it isn't like you get everything for free anyway. You want a private or semi-private room? Well, you pay for it not the government. A new treatment for cancer that hasn't been added to the public plan yet? You can have it, but you need to pay for it. Medicine, you pay for it. Cosmetic stuff? Dental work. Eye exams. You pay, not the government.


Anyway, anyone think the Republicans might budge on "taxes for the rich" if they bump it from incomes of 250,000 to 500,000 or even 1million? I doubt it, but I think it'd be reasonable.
 
Last edited:
Livewire

Livewire

14,092
Posts
14
Years
Rodriguezjames55 said:
at one point Supreme Court said slavery was
Click to expand...

Obviously, Slavery is = Obamacare.

So you're comparing two different courts, two different America's, (literaly) two different types of arguments, 150 years apart? No such comparison can be made logically. The Affordable Care Act was ruled constitutional, end of discussion.

Best part is that Obama will likely get to appoint more Supreme Court Justices by the end of 2016. Meaning he can assure that his legislation will survive for a few decades at the very least, perhaps longer depending on how long it takes the GOP to turn around.
 

FreakyLocz14

Conservative Patriot
3,498
Posts
14
Years
  • Seen Aug 29, 2018
TRIFORCE89 said:
No one expects to be taken care of. Particularly by the government. They do hope to be able to see a doctor without losing their house though.

And not everyone dies from Big Macs. People get seriously ill. People have accidents

We have universal health care here in Canada. Health care is not provided by or performed by the government. Doctors and their practices are private entities. What the government provides here is just a baseline level of health insurance. We still need to buy private health insurance. We still need to rely on drug plans from our employers. What the government plan does though is enable you to see a doctor when you think you need it. You don't need to wait if you can't afford it. Waiting makes things worse. Preventive care, which in the long run is less of a burden on the government.

And it isn't like you get everything for free anyway. You want a private or semi-private room? Well, you pay for it not the government. A new treatment for cancer that hasn't been added to the public plan yet? You can have it, but you need to pay for it. Medicine, you pay for it. Cosmetic stuff? Dental work. Eye exams. You pay, not the government.


Anyway, anyone think the Republicans might budge on "taxes for the rich" if they bump it from incomes of 250,000 to 500,000 or even 1million? I doubt it, but I think it'd be reasonable.
Click to expand...

So Canada's "universal health care" really doesn't cover anything of significance? Visiting a doctor alone is meaningless without the treatment necessary if it is needed. Medicare in the United States actually does cover prescription drugs, though it was controversial when Bush signed into law Medicare Part D.

The fact still remains that the United States is the most unhealthy of the industrialized nations. Physical education and sports programs are being cut nationwide, and parents are feeding their children GMO fattening foods in their laziness. We are also increasingly becoming a more sedentary society. Much of the problems with our health can be addressed by attacking the roots of the problem: our lifestyles.

Livewire said:
Obviously, Slavery is = Obamacare.

So you're comparing two different courts, two different America's, (literaly) two different types of arguments, 150 years apart? No such comparison can be made logically. The Affordable Care Act was ruled constitutional, end of discussion.

Best part is that Obama will likely get to appoint more Supreme Court Justices by the end of 2016. Meaning he can assure that his legislation will survive for a few decades at the very least, perhaps longer depending on how long it takes the GOP to turn around.
Click to expand...

The Supreme Court also ruled that sodomy laws were constitutional. That was in 1980s, not 150 years ago. The point is that, while the Supreme Court does set the final precedent, that doesn't mean that Congress is prohibited from repealing the Court's mistakes. The Court has even overruled itself several times when it finally realized that it was wrong.

Don't get too optimistic about Obama's judicial nominees. We still have enough GOP Senators to filibuster them!
 
Last edited:

TRIFORCE89

Guide of Darkness
8,123
Posts
19
Years
FreakyLocz14 said:
So Canada's "universal health care" really doesn't cover anything of significance? Visiting a doctor alone is meaningless without the treatment necessary if it is needed. Medicare in the United States actually does cover prescription drugs, though it was controversial when Bush signed into law Medicare Part D.
Click to expand...
You get treatment, as in procedures or surgery and other things of consequence - but mostly not prescription drugs (though there are exceptions). At least in Ontario. Federal money is divided up among the Provinces and added to their health budgets. So, coverage is different in each of the Provinces. Which I think is stupid. Regardless, by and large you get treatment. Mostly drugs you need to worry about and new experimental treatments that aren't under the public plan yet. So, a drug plan and private insurance is still needed to fill in the gaps.

You can get medical supplies/tools, it can cover travel, nursing/home care, therapy and rehabilitation (like physio for instance), examinations, tests, physicians, podiatry, dental (if done in a hospital), certain treatments, etc.

All "universal health care" ensures is a baseline for everyone. You want to go beyond it, you need to cover that some how
 
Mr. X

Mr. X

It's... kinda effective?
2,391
Posts
17
Years
FreakyLocz14 said:
The fact still remains that the United States is the most unhealthy of the industrialized nations. Physical education and sports programs are being cut nationwide, and parents are feeding their children GMO fattening foods in their laziness. We are also increasingly becoming a more sedentary lifestyle. Much of the problems with our health can be addressed by attacking the roots of the problem: our lifestyles.
Click to expand...

Some states have tried, but those laws were later repealed. (Their fat-tax laws, and regulations on sugary drinks)

In this case we do need Federal intervention. We need them to step up and force food companies to sell healthier foods, and other things.

And, really, they can justifiably do this as the poor lifestyles are affecting our national security. Each year we have fewer and fewer people in good enough physical condition to join the army/navy/airforce/whatever. The fewer and fewer numbers of potential recruits means a continuously smaller army, meaning increasingly less national security.
 
Livewire

Livewire

14,092
Posts
14
Years
FreakyLocz14 said:
The Supreme Court also ruled that sodomy laws were constitutional. That was in 1980s, not 150 years ago. The point is that, while the Supreme Court does set the final precedent, that doesn't mean that Congress is prohibited from repealing the Court's mistakes. The Court has even overruled itself several times when it finally realized that it was wrong.

Don't get too optimistic about Obama's judicial nominees. We still have enough GOP Senators to filibuster them!
Click to expand...

If Roe V. Wade has stood this long then Obamacare needn't worry.

Did you see any of the election results? Obstruction didn't fly last time. And lol. 4 years is an awful long time to idle or to waste time talking on the floor. Not even Mitch McConnell himself is that full of hot air.
 

FreakyLocz14

Conservative Patriot
3,498
Posts
14
Years
  • Seen Aug 29, 2018
Mr. X said:
Some states have tried, but those laws were later repealed. (Their fat-tax laws, and regulations on sugary drinks)

In this case we do need Federal intervention. We need them to step up and force food companies to sell healthier foods, and other things.

And, really, they can justifiably do this as the poor lifestyles are affecting our national security. Each year we have fewer and fewer people in good enough physical condition to join the army/navy/airforce/whatever. The fewer and fewer numbers of potential recruits means a continuously smaller army, meaning increasingly less national security.
Click to expand...

"Fat taxes" don't really deter people from eating unhealthy, just like cigarette taxes haven't really deterred people from smoking. All they are good for is generating revenue for the government, not solving our health problems. Instead, we need to make sure that physical education, sports programs, and health classes remain a part of school curriculum, and educate parents about making healthy choices for their children.

Livewire said:
If Roe V. Wade has stood this long then Obamacare needn't worry.

Did you see any of the election results? Obstruction didn't fly last time. And lol. 4 years is an awful long time to idle or to waste time talking on the floor. Not even Mitch McConnell himself is that full of hot air.
Click to expand...

Obama won't be nominating new Supreme Court Justices his entire term, so there will be no need to talk on the floor for 4 years.

We're already concerting an effort to encourage GOP Congressmen and Senators to agree to things like temporary tax hikes for this wealthy, military budget cuts, and comprehensive immigration reform in exchange for the repeal of Obamacare. Let's see if Obama will put his money where is mouth is when he talks about wanting to compromise!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top