Fact is fact, Tea Partiers are extremists

[boedicca]

I think that's one of the aspects being attempted here, Boe.

Notice I've always said "Attempts" or "Aims" or "Tries." Never said it would work, we'll have to find out together.

Don't you think providing subsidies to working people who don't make that much aims to do what you just said?

No. I don't. Providing subsidies so that someone is compensated more than what would be the market rate for their productivity Stunts that person. Where is his incentive to improve his skills and knowledge so he can better his lot in life?

And why should productive businesses subsidize the one which employs that person? Wouldn't it be better for the more successful business to use that capital to grow and hire people for better paying jobs?

Not all jobs in an economy are going to generate sufficient income to support a person or family. Such jobs are entry level or supplemental income ones - which have a purpose - especially in the area of employing teenagers so they can develop work ethics. Sadly, minimum wage laws and other such nonsense has distorted this market, resulting in incredibly high unemployment among teens (especially black males).

 

[Xenophon]

I think that's one of the aspects being attempted here, Boe.

Notice I've always said "Attempts" or "Aims" or "Tries." Never said it would work, we'll have to find out together.

Don't you think providing subsidies to working people who don't make that much aims to do what you just said?

Do you not understand that the government is bankrupt, is running a massive deficiet and its because of these little giveaways?

#1, it's paid for, unless you're among those calling CBO liars.

#2, just the annual interest on Bush's debt is more than the entire program's annual cost. Let alone the actual debt under the last administration, just the interest on that debt outweighs this program.

Plus, if it encourages people to work as I purport, more workers means more revenues @ any tax rate; Also less UI benefits and potentially, more growth. Certainly better job mobility as well.

The first bill didn't have the Doc fix in it, so it would score as not costing anything, but would make the bill unfunded.

Do you not understand the slight of hand used here?

With the funding it becomes a trillion in the red by 2020.

 

[NYcarbineer]

One of the head goobers from Tea Party Express or Nation, or whatever, was on MSNBC this morning slamming Sarah Palin and calling John McCain a liberal. I thought that was pretty funny.

 

[Xenophon]

One of the head goobers from Tea Party Express or Nation, or whatever, was on MSNBC this morning slamming Sarah Palin and calling John McCain a liberal. I thought that was pretty funny.

And here is yet another example of what i keep saying about propaganda:

THERE ARE NO LEADERS TO IT.

Anyone that claims that is lying.

 

[AllieBaba]

MSNBC works hard to find spasmodics, and pass them off as typical.

 

[Cuyo]

Do you not understand that the government is bankrupt, is running a massive deficiet and its because of these little giveaways?

#1, it's paid for, unless you're among those calling CBO liars.

#2, just the annual interest on Bush's debt is more than the entire program's annual cost. Let alone the actual debt under the last administration, just the interest on that debt outweighs this program.

Plus, if it encourages people to work as I purport, more workers means more revenues @ any tax rate; Also less UI benefits and potentially, more growth. Certainly better job mobility as well.

The first bill didn't have the Doc fix in it, so it would score as not costing anything, but would make the bill unfunded.

Do you not understand the slight of hand used here?

With the funding it becomes a trillion in the red by 2020.

http://cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11379/Manager'sAmendmenttoReconciliationProposal.pdf

Page 5. Increased spending yes, but increased revenue outweighs the same. I'd like to see somebody give a genuine answer; "Yes that may be true, but I disapprove of the additional taxes and/or cuts to medicare."

 

[gautama]

^ What a fucking stupid and baseless partisan hack thing to say.

^ What a completely typical response from a low information republican.

Alas, poor retarded culo, has nothing and it shows. Speaking of "low information."

If culo DID have any valid information about that hideous legislation that just got passed (and IF he were honest instead of just being a partisan hack working off of a sheet of meaningless talking points prepared by the dishonest leftists who ruin the Democrap Party), then culo would NEVER have spewed the abysmally IGNORANT contention that that law has ANYTHING to do with insuring equality.

This raises the question. Is culo more liar than stupid or more stupid than liar?

From what I've read, it is more accurate to FIRST state that Cuyo is a Culo and a Culo is a Cuyo ... THEN wonder if it's possible that he is one of the MOST stupidist liars extant.

Please do not make a hasty decision. There are many contenders for that title. Examples: RDeanie the Hopeless Weanie, The Phoney Baloney Leftwinger masquerading as the Right Winger,Clueless Gregg of the Obamarrhoidal dregs, etc., are just a few of the male contenders....

The female persuasion may be represented by Jillian, who is proud of having serviced Jerry Rubin (whose hero is Charlie Manson)....and trumpeted this info about. TRuthDoesn'tMatter, the easiest among the stupidist, although is merely a contender for the most deceitful. FrumpyGrumpy, one of the more newer contenders.....

Charlie Bass ???? ? Now there is an incomparable arsehole literally of a different colour. I would not put him in the running because even though he'd probably take the title.....He should be excluded because this idiot is clearly insane. Among THIS category, this Charlie Bass category.....MarcATL would be a coequal......no question 'bout it.

 

[Cuyo]

I think that's one of the aspects being attempted here, Boe.

Notice I've always said "Attempts" or "Aims" or "Tries." Never said it would work, we'll have to find out together.

Don't you think providing subsidies to working people who don't make that much aims to do what you just said?

No. I don't. Providing subsidies so that someone is compensated more than what would be the market rate for their productivity Stunts that person. Where is his incentive to improve his skills and knowledge so he can better his lot in life?

And why should productive businesses subsidize the one which employs that person? Wouldn't it be better for the more successful business to use that capital to grow and hire people for better paying jobs?

Not all jobs in an economy are going to generate sufficient income to support a person or family. Such jobs are entry level or supplemental income ones - which have a purpose - especially in the area of employing teenagers so they can develop work ethics. Sadly, minimum wage laws and other such nonsense has distorted this market, resulting in incredibly high unemployment among teens (especially black males).

I was referring to individual subsidies. It ain't perfect. But it's better than "Below this line, you get free healthcare. Above this line, you get nothing." THAT, which is the status quo, rewards not working.

 

[Xenophon]

#1, it's paid for, unless you're among those calling CBO liars.

#2, just the annual interest on Bush's debt is more than the entire program's annual cost. Let alone the actual debt under the last administration, just the interest on that debt outweighs this program.

Plus, if it encourages people to work as I purport, more workers means more revenues @ any tax rate; Also less UI benefits and potentially, more growth. Certainly better job mobility as well.

The first bill didn't have the Doc fix in it, so it would score as not costing anything, but would make the bill unfunded.

Do you not understand the slight of hand used here?

With the funding it becomes a trillion in the red by 2020.

http://cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11379/Manager'sAmendmenttoReconciliationProposal.pdf

Page 5. Increased spending yes, but increased revenue outweighs the same. I'd like to see somebody give a genuine answer; "Yes that may be true, but I disapprove of the additional taxes and/or cuts to medicare."

Are you aware the CBO mis scored medicare and medicaid by over 1,000%?

that the actual costs ended up being 10 times the estimate?

This bill is a disaster in everyway possible, and it didn't have to be, they could have easily passed the good things like no pre existing condition refusals and payout caps without the bad things.

 

[jillian]

Maybe you should spend your time doing something constructive like trying to suck your own dick

speaking from experience?

 

[Contumacious]

Right-wing extremists taint Tea Party protests, hurt conservative cause | The Eagle Online

This was from a conservative on conservatives. The Tea Partiers are sick extremist monkeys with severe mental issues and are in need of help. When you believe lies are the truth and believe it as gospel something is wrong.

But dictating and severely limiting the people's freedom is not a sign of state supremacist extremism?

.

 

[Cuyo]

The first bill didn't have the Doc fix in it, so it would score as not costing anything, but would make the bill unfunded.

Do you not understand the slight of hand used here?

With the funding it becomes a trillion in the red by 2020.

http://cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11379/Manager'sAmendmenttoReconciliationProposal.pdf

Page 5. Increased spending yes, but increased revenue outweighs the same. I'd like to see somebody give a genuine answer; "Yes that may be true, but I disapprove of the additional taxes and/or cuts to medicare."

Are you aware the CBO mis scored medicare and medicaid by over 1,000%?

that the actual costs ended up being 10 times the estimate?

This bill is a disaster in everyway possible, and it didn't have to be, they could have easily passed the good things like no pre existing condition refusals and payout caps without the bad things.

Well yes, when medicare was adopted, the average life expectancy mandated that most people would either never collect, or collect for a very short period of time. They couldn't foresee people regularly living 20 years into their benefit period.

And yes, if in 50-some years we're typically living to 110, the system will collapse again and need to be revamped. But that's true with or without this bill, as it would have been true with or without Medicare.

Passing pre-existing conditions and payout caps alone [and presumably without revenue boosters like taxes] would have done what, exactly to insurance costs?

 

[Xenophon]

http://cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11379/Manager'sAmendmenttoReconciliationProposal.pdf

Page 5. Increased spending yes, but increased revenue outweighs the same. I'd like to see somebody give a genuine answer; "Yes that may be true, but I disapprove of the additional taxes and/or cuts to medicare."

Are you aware the CBO mis scored medicare and medicaid by over 1,000%?

that the actual costs ended up being 10 times the estimate?

This bill is a disaster in everyway possible, and it didn't have to be, they could have easily passed the good things like no pre existing condition refusals and payout caps without the bad things.

Well yes, when medicare was adopted, the average life expectancy mandated that most people would either never collect, or collect for a very short period of time. They couldn't foresee people regularly living 20 years into their benefit period.

And yes, if in 50-some years we're typically living to 110, the system will collapse again and need to be revamped. But that's true with or without this bill, as it would have been true with or without Medicare.

Passing pre-existing conditions and payout caps alone [and presumably without revenue boosters like taxes] would have done what, exactly to insurance costs?

This was exactly the wrong time to add a new trillion dollar entitillment, we don't have the money.

This was a manufactured issue from day one, before this started polls showed 80% of americans were satisfied with their healthcare, in the USA that is a whopping concensus.

 

[Cuyo]

This was exactly the wrong time to add a new trillion dollar entitillment, we don't have the money.

This was a manufactured issue from day one, before this started polls showed 80% of americans were satisfied with their healthcare, in the USA that is a whopping concensus.

A lot of the people think their healthcare works. They haven't become the kind of burden on their insurer yet that would trigger them being dropped.

A lot more still don't realize that their employer based healthcare is in lieu of additional wages. They think it's free.

And as for me personally, I don't like the fact that the larger the company, the better group rate they can get, whereas an individual or self-employed person such as myself get raped. People should be able to pool the same as large companies. I don't see anything wrong with the government helping to orchestrate this.

 

[AllieBaba]

Nobody who gets health insurance through an employer thinks it's free.

It must be nice to think everyone except yourself and your buddies are slobbering idiots.

 

[Cuyo]

Nobody who gets health insurance through an employer thinks it's free.

It must be nice to think everyone except yourself and your buddies are slobbering idiots.

Wow... ! My image of you is blown. You're sooooo profound!

I'm going to the courthouse tomorrow to change my registration to Republican. Thanks for the epiphany!

 

[AllieBaba]

I don't generally worry too much about changing the way narrow minded and ignorant people think. It's impossible. It's best just to shine a light on them.

 

[NYcarbineer]

One of the head goobers from Tea Party Express or Nation, or whatever, was on MSNBC this morning slamming Sarah Palin and calling John McCain a liberal. I thought that was pretty funny.

And here is yet another example of what i keep saying about propaganda:

THERE ARE NO LEADERS TO IT.

Anyone that claims that is lying.

Yeah right, a Tea Partier thinking that John McCain isn't conservative enough is another isolated incident. lolol

 

[Cuyo]

I don't generally worry too much about changing the way narrow minded and ignorant people think. It's impossible. It's best just to shine a light on them.

Well now the spotlight's on you, amigo. Since this statist solution is so evil and wrong, what do you propose? Or do you believe the current system was not headed for disaster?

All I've seen you do is insult people who have democratic/leftist ideologies. I've seen nothing of substance posted by you, ever. So, besides the fact that you hate Obama and the dems, hell, probably me, what do you suggest we do to fix a broken system? Sell across state lines and tort reform? puh-leeze.

 

[Xenophon]

One of the head goobers from Tea Party Express or Nation, or whatever, was on MSNBC this morning slamming Sarah Palin and calling John McCain a liberal. I thought that was pretty funny.

And here is yet another example of what i keep saying about propaganda:

THERE ARE NO LEADERS TO IT.

Anyone that claims that is lying.

Yeah right, a Tea Partier thinking that John McCain isn't conservative enough is another isolated incident. lolol

You are a good example of not getting it.

The movement isn't 'conservatives' either, its about people who want a responsible government that lives within its means.