Lets get this straight

So whats the answer? for everyone to become a liberal democrat? You are either a defeatist or a liberal plant, I am still on the fence as to which.

well, if I said we should adopt something like Germany or Poland, or even Sweden - which I did years ago alibeit on a different board - you'd call me a RINO. But, as Sweden demonstrates, it's not socialism to use tax policy, even progressive tax policy, to get people into private markets. It's only socialism when the market is single payor.

Nevertheless, since you ask, I'd be inclined to return to voting gop if the party honestly said let's take something like the obamacare taxes and move to a Swedish (or Pole) model, and then explain in Reagan like terms why its better for people to take more control over their own insurance.

Sweden is a country with a small homogeneous population, its more like a large extended family, what might work there would never work here.

Note to some of the lefties-----------I did not call the swedes homosexuals. :eusa_whistle:

perhaps you didn't...

But wouldn't it be great if all Swedish women were bisexual?

Actually, I believe they are.

Actually, I believe ALL women are bisexual...some just haven't tried it yet.
 
So whats the answer? for everyone to become a liberal democrat? You are either a defeatist or a liberal plant, I am still on the fence as to which.

well, if I said we should adopt something like Germany or Poland, or even Sweden - which I did years ago alibeit on a different board - you'd call me a RINO. But, as Sweden demonstrates, it's not socialism to use tax policy, even progressive tax policy, to get people into private markets. It's only socialism when the market is single payor.

Nevertheless, since you ask, I'd be inclined to return to voting gop if the party honestly said let's take something like the obamacare taxes and move to a Swedish (or Pole) model, and then explain in Reagan like terms why its better for people to take more control over their own insurance.

I guess I am confused. Do people go to Germany, sweden, or Poland when they have serious medical conditions?

They do come to the USA, wonder why that is.

I know someone who went to Canada for a surgical procedure that was not approved in the USA.

Sadly, he died before it was his turn for the surgery.

2 years later, it was approved in the US.
 
well, if I said we should adopt something like Germany or Poland, or even Sweden - which I did years ago alibeit on a different board - you'd call me a RINO. But, as Sweden demonstrates, it's not socialism to use tax policy, even progressive tax policy, to get people into private markets. It's only socialism when the market is single payor.

Nevertheless, since you ask, I'd be inclined to return to voting gop if the party honestly said let's take something like the obamacare taxes and move to a Swedish (or Pole) model, and then explain in Reagan like terms why its better for people to take more control over their own insurance.

Sweden is a country with a small homogeneous population, its more like a large extended family, what might work there would never work here.

Note to some of the lefties-----------I did not call the swedes homosexuals. :eusa_whistle:

perhaps you didn't...

But wouldn't it be great if all Swedish women were bisexual?

Actually, I believe they are.

Actually, I believe ALL women are bisexual...some just haven't tried it yet.

Just...ewwww
 
The GOP wanted to waiver the employer mandate for a full year and Obama said no. In fact, he shut down the government because he would not extend the employer mandate.

Nope. The GOP tried to defund all of ObamaCare in the budgets they kept submitting. Don't be trying to revise recent history. Some of us have longer memories than you goldfish.

Your topic is therefore based on an entirely false premise, and thus fails.

Does it hurt to be so wrong all the time?

Republicans seek Obamacare delay to stop shutdown | NDTV.com

World | Associated Press | Updated: September 29, 2013 08:25 IST


Washington: House Republicans on Saturday pushed the government to the brink of a partial shutdown in two days, nearing passage of a one-year delay in implementing major parts of President Barack Obama's health care law in defiance of the White House and Democratic-controlled Senate.

The White House quickly issued a veto threat and Senate Democrats vowed to reject the measure even before the House of Representatives began debating the Republican plan.
"Any member of the Republican Party who votes for this bill is voting for a shutdown," presidential press secretary Jay Carney said in a statement.

Undeterred, House Republicans pressed ahead with their latest attempt to squeeze a concession from the White House in exchange for providing the funds the government needs to open for business normally on Tuesday. The House Republican plan also would repeal a tax on medical devices that helps pay for the health care law.

You're welcome for the history refresher.
 
Sweden is a country with a small homogeneous population, its more like a large extended family, what might work there would never work here.

Note to some of the lefties-----------I did not call the swedes homosexuals. :eusa_whistle:

perhaps you didn't...

But wouldn't it be great if all Swedish women were bisexual?

Actually, I believe they are.

Actually, I believe ALL women are bisexual...some just haven't tried it yet.

Just...ewwww
hey...I'm a guy.....

Synonyms for guy:

1) pervert
2) dreamer
3) pervert
 
I guess I am confused. Do people go to Germany, sweden, or Poland when they have serious medical conditions?

Yes. Yes they do.

Germany health care and medical tourism services

Germany is considered by many the “Hospital of Europe”.

The country has more than twice as many hospitals per 1,000 citizens than the United States. German medical facilities also treat almost twice as many patients per capita than hospitals in the United States.

No waiting lists

With well staffed and abundant medical facilities in Germany the result is generally no waiting list. This is very attractive for people who cannot receive treatment quickly or are not able or do not want to wait for their treatment.


Poland as a destination for Swedish medical tourists

Swedes are one of the most mobile nationality in Europe. For several years ago people started to combine leisure travelling with medical background, e.g. surgeries, beauty and dental treatments or spa/wellness tourism, that were a lot cheaper than in Sweden.
 
I guess I am confused. Do people go to Germany, sweden, or Poland when they have serious medical conditions?

Yes. Yes they do.

Germany health care and medical tourism services

Germany is considered by many the “Hospital of Europe”.

The country has more than twice as many hospitals per 1,000 citizens than the United States. German medical facilities also treat almost twice as many patients per capita than hospitals in the United States.

No waiting lists

With well staffed and abundant medical facilities in Germany the result is generally no waiting list. This is very attractive for people who cannot receive treatment quickly or are not able or do not want to wait for their treatment.


Poland as a destination for Swedish medical tourists

Swedes are one of the most mobile nationality in Europe. For several years ago people started to combine leisure travelling with medical background, e.g. surgeries, beauty and dental treatments or spa/wellness tourism, that were a lot cheaper than in Sweden.

Stop trying to seriously and rationally discuss things.... dammit! LOL
 
I guess I am confused. Do people go to Germany, sweden, or Poland when they have serious medical conditions?

Yes. Yes they do.

Germany health care and medical tourism services

Germany is considered by many the “Hospital of Europe”.

The country has more than twice as many hospitals per 1,000 citizens than the United States. German medical facilities also treat almost twice as many patients per capita than hospitals in the United States.

No waiting lists

With well staffed and abundant medical facilities in Germany the result is generally no waiting list. This is very attractive for people who cannot receive treatment quickly or are not able or do not want to wait for their treatment.


Poland as a destination for Swedish medical tourists

Swedes are one of the most mobile nationality in Europe. For several years ago people started to combine leisure travelling with medical background, e.g. surgeries, beauty and dental treatments or spa/wellness tourism, that were a lot cheaper than in Sweden.

Overall, I don't totally dislike the idea of public healthcare or some fundamental overhaul. It's a unique sector, definitely.

However, the problem I have with Obamacare is that it's total shit! It's preposterous! We have an insurance based model that isn't working, so to fix it you’re going to propose to still keep that same insurance based system, but only now FORCE people to participate? How savings will come from that defies all logic. On top of it, insurance companies will now have to accept pre-existing conditions, which obviously will drive the price even higher.

If someone could explain the logic I’d definitely be open to listen…
 
Last edited:
I guess I am confused. Do people go to Germany, sweden, or Poland when they have serious medical conditions?

Yes. Yes they do.

Germany health care and medical tourism services






Poland as a destination for Swedish medical tourists

Swedes are one of the most mobile nationality in Europe. For several years ago people started to combine leisure travelling with medical background, e.g. surgeries, beauty and dental treatments or spa/wellness tourism, that were a lot cheaper than in Sweden.

Overall, I don't totally dislike the idea of public healthcare or some fundamental overhaul. It's a unique sector, definitely.

However, the problem I have with Obamacare is that it's total shit! It's preposterous! We have an insurance based model that isn't working, so to fix it you’re going to propose to still keep that same insurance based system, but only now FORCE people to participate? How savings will come from that defies all logic. On top of it, insurance companies will now have to accept pre-existing conditions, which obviously will drive the price even higher.

If someone could explain the logic I’d definitely be open to listen…

At the risk of being redundant, there are two possible explanations: the dems are actually so incompetent that they aimed for something like the German model and missed, akin to an Apollo mission going into the sun; OR the goal is single payor, and the means is to develop a totally unworkable scheme in terms of a private market, but ultimatey will protect the huge insurors like Blue Cross that will administer the plan much less efficiently than medicare administered, and the providers may keep charging costs that consumers have no means of comparing to other providers.
 
The gop shut down the govt. The gop lost, and that's why Boehner is trying to pass a clean debt resolution.

Cruz led you guys down the primrose path by trying to PREVENT obamacare from beginning, when in reality the gop needs to get out of the way of the trainwreck.

But, the gop's problem is that Americans will want SOMETHING. It may not be Obamacare, but there's not going back all the way.

Hi bendog:
to avoid a shutdown GOP leaders in Congress pulled together an agreement that
required only TWO points to be changed on the ACA funding, which were generally
agreed upon by members of BOTH parties. it was obstruction by Obama and Democrats
who refused to accept these terms, in order to shut down govt and blame Republicans:

(a) removing the tax on medical devices that was generally opposed by BOTH parties because it had a detrimental effect of burdening companies trying to provide medical services, so this was bipartisan agreement to ax that condition especially during economic recovery (b) delay the individual mandate for one year, which again was generally supported since Obama delayed the EMPLOYER mandate for one year, so why not with the individual mandate until this was worked out

When I first heard that Congressional leaders had worked out this plan to pass the budget with just these two sticking points that everyone I talked with AGREED needed to be removed ANYWAY, I was very hopeful. I even posted a petition pushing Congressional reps to accept these two points, delay the individual mandate and pass the budget to prevent the shutdown.

for Republicans to reach this agreement took a LOT of work. So this was good news!
These two points took a lot of work to negotiate. I talked with a lot of opponents to ACA who wanted to cut ACA altogether and were resistant to stick to just these two points which people on all sides agreed were the main problems they generally agreed to remove

the GOP DID WORK through the TOUGHEST objections from party members who wanted 100% repeal and refused to budge otherwise, and DID get their party members in Congress to AGREE to just these two points to prevent a govt shutdown. Most ppl agreed.

But it was Obama who refused to sign anything that had any changes at all to ACA.
He was determined to play hardball because he didn't want to give any room to others.
it was a political play for power. He is still trying to use ACA like a weapon to prove his dominance because he is not seen as a promilitary leader and uses this as a political front.

So he insists that he alone can unilateral alter federal laws, to overextend executive powers to unilaterally amend legislation so he can change the ACA but not Congress? WTF?

This is as twisted as writing, passing pushing and interpreting ACA as "not a tax" to get it through Congress, then changing it to argue, push and interpret "as a tax" to get it through the Supreme Court. It was not written and passed through the proper Constitutional procedures as a tax/revenue bill, yet the Supreme Court "interpreted" it that way.

Similar to how slaves were human, but "interpreted" to be 3/5 human and 2/5 property?
This was legally established, that slaves were property as interpreted and enforced by law, but was contradictory! So is a bill written and passed as "not being a tax" so it would get past Congress; then re-defined as a tax so it can be interpreted that way by Court!

What gets me, is the last serious teacher I ever had who taught me the history and spirit of Constitutional laws, separation of powers and checks and balances was my eighth grade history teacher. He taught where they came from, from traditions from the first written laws down through the European political writings on natural laws and rights, etc.

Don't tell me that I have a better understanding of Constitutional law and due process
than the President of the United States who went to Harvard Law School?

It seems the only thing people learn these days is POLITICS.
How to bully and play hardball to punish people into submission, even at the cost
of taxpayers and the equal representation and interests of the American people.

Only counting the views of ONE PARTY as law, while the others don't count as long as you can abuse majority rule and political tradeoffs to win votes to overrule them.

What happened to Fourteenth Amendment rights to equal protection of the laws
from discrimination by creed? This is clearly partisan and against the Code of Ethics
for Government Service.

Unbelievable that someone with no more education in history and Constitutional law than 8th grade gets what is wrong with this picture; and someone with a law degree from Harvard thinks that as long as you hold office and have majority votes you can pass whatever you want and it becomes law until something stops you or proven otherwise.

The President and co-conspirators with the Democrat advocates for ACA are clearly in violation of oath of office and duty to uphold Constitutional regulations as also stated in the Code of Ethics for Government Service. This is "eighth grade" level reading material.
They must not teach this at Harvard Law School. Maybe we should start suing law schools for negligence in giving law degrees to such, like policing manufacturers who put guns in the hands of criminals.
 
The GOP wanted to waiver the employer mandate for a full year and Obama said no. In fact, he shut down the government because he would not extend the employer mandate.

That was then....


This week, he unilaterally extended the employer mandate without legal authority.

So tell Me, why did he shut down government?

This is an ignorant thread obama wavied the employer mandate before the shut down. The republican's sent the senate one last bill to delay the individual mandate for one year
 
The GOP wanted to waiver the employer mandate for a full year and Obama said no. In fact, he shut down the government because he would not extend the employer mandate.

That was then....


This week, he unilaterally extended the employer mandate without legal authority.

So tell Me, why did he shut down government?

So he could blame the republicans! Totally political.
 
The GOP wanted to waiver the employer mandate for a full year and Obama said no. In fact, he shut down the government because he would not extend the employer mandate.

That was then....


This week, he unilaterally extended the employer mandate without legal authority.

So tell Me, why did he shut down government?

Bush's Fault
Oh..
It's called sarcasm. But you knew that. no offense intended.

Oh yeah, I never heard Bush blame anyone else for the problems he inherited. And Clinton left him a shipload of them.
 
Last edited:
Threads with titles like "Let's get this straight" from a Conservative always prove that Conservatives are entirely wrong.

And the worst/funniest/saddest part of it is that Conservatives will never admit how wrong they are. That's why they're Conservatives. They don't know how to change. They simply refuse to learn.

The Teabaggers shut down the government. Everyone knows that. A few Conservative simpletons on an internet forum aren't going to change that fact.
Get back to Me when you stop spewing the DNC/Marxist talking points.
 

Forum List

Back
Top