Welcome to Gaia! ::

I don't see myself as a conservative or a liberal, in each different area I land on a different place on the spectrum -- such as I might place more emphasis on the economy then say the war, for example. So I can't really talk for the conservatives nor the liberals, but as an "in-betweener" (or moderate if you'd like to call the stance that) I can say that I'm scared.

I have the Republicans blaring out how this is the end of the world, now wringing their hands sheepishly on the side since the effects of the bill won't take place until a few years from now (only a few immediate things such as pre-existing conditions, children being able to remain under their parent's insurance until the age of 24 or was it 26? And so on).

Liberals raving on how amazing and awesome President Obama is, how we're headed towards change and what have you. But this is also the same man who proposed to be transparent with the public, but somehow managed to shut the doors to make deals privately with a state or two on what conditions they are willing to use their vote pro-reform (It was all over the news a few months ago).

Naturally, I'm skeptical of the two, but it's quite terrifying to hear something is going to effect us -- and not know what it is. I don't know about everyone else, but I certainly don't have time to read +1,000 paged bill and sort out the legal mumbo jumbo that I already encounter in the USC (United States Code). All I'm saying is, that this matter isn't black and white, but full of shades of gray.
snowdrift_2
I don't see myself as a conservative or a liberal, in each different area I land on a different place on the spectrum -- such as I might place more emphasis on the economy then say the war, for example. So I can't really talk for the conservatives nor the liberals, but as an "in-betweener" (or moderate if you'd like to call the stance that) I can say that I'm scared.

I have the Republicans blaring out how this is the end of the world, now wringing their hands sheepishly on the side since the effects of the bill won't take place until a few years from now (only a few immediate things such as pre-existing conditions, children being able to remain under their parent's insurance until the age of 24 or was it 26? And so on).

Liberals raving on how amazing and awesome President Obama is, how we're headed towards change and what have you. But this is also the same man who proposed to be transparent with the public, but somehow managed to shut the doors to make deals privately with a state or two on what conditions they are willing to use their vote pro-reform (It was all over the news a few months ago).

Naturally, I'm skeptical of the two, but it's quite terrifying to hear something is going to effect us -- and not know what it is. I don't know about everyone else, but I certainly don't have time to read +1,000 paged bill and sort out the legal mumbo jumbo that I already encounter in the USC (United States Code). All I'm saying is, that this matter isn't black and white, but full of shades of gray.


Yes, there were certainly issues with transparency, but the benefits remain. Any unbiased factchecking site will tell you this. The bill was a lesson for both sides in the bill-passing process, especially in the Senate.
Cop Of The Century
Bigt275316
Ace IV
Bigt275316
Conservatives believe in only money.

If you don't have it sucks to be you

If you can't make it sucks to be you.


User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.


Your the only troll here, clearly you can't debate the points.

But congradulations on being reported for spamming


You don't tell someone you're reporting them. That's against the rules.

Ironically enough, it is considered trolling by Gaia staff.
Cyber Saliva's avatar

Dapper Elder

6,550 Points
  • Forum Dabbler 200
  • Flatterer 200
  • Beta Gaian 0
Azur-emi
Interrobang2rd
... kids not being denied because of a p/e condition?

... not being dropped for getting sick?

... tax credits for small businesses?

... an exchange?

No, seriously? Will somebody please explain this to me?


Of course everyone wants it, but many against it are that way because they're thinking ahead, and not just saying things that sounds good.

For example, you might say, "People shouldn;t be denied because of a p/e condition"
However, if you thought about the consequences, you would know that if a law like that passed, then healthcare costs would go up because now the insurance companies have to cover more people. They're not going to take a loss in their profit gains, so they'll just raise prices to cover the difference.
The way that you worded things really don't make sense and can be used against you. For example,
Why are liberals...
...thinking that hard workers don't deserve all of their money?
...wanting people who do nothing, never went to school, aren't looking for a job, etc. receive money from those to do well?

Sorry, I'm really not the one for debating, but I hope you get my point haha

So you're saying your money is worth more than your life, basically.

Well, good luck with that one. I'd love to know your stance on this debate when you get denied treatment for your cancer because your insurance company TORE THROUGH your medical records to find that you maybe ONCE didn't mention that you scraped your knee in the 11th grade. THAT is what some insurance companies call a "Pre-Existing Condition". And it's a reason to let you die.

How much money you have won't matter then.
Cyber Saliva
Azur-emi
Interrobang2rd
... kids not being denied because of a p/e condition?

... not being dropped for getting sick?

... tax credits for small businesses?

... an exchange?

No, seriously? Will somebody please explain this to me?


Of course everyone wants it, but many against it are that way because they're thinking ahead, and not just saying things that sounds good.

For example, you might say, "People shouldn;t be denied because of a p/e condition"
However, if you thought about the consequences, you would know that if a law like that passed, then healthcare costs would go up because now the insurance companies have to cover more people. They're not going to take a loss in their profit gains, so they'll just raise prices to cover the difference.
The way that you worded things really don't make sense and can be used against you. For example,
Why are liberals...
...thinking that hard workers don't deserve all of their money?
...wanting people who do nothing, never went to school, aren't looking for a job, etc. receive money from those to do well?

Sorry, I'm really not the one for debating, but I hope you get my point haha

So you're saying your money is worth more than your life, basically.

Well, good luck with that one. I'd love to know your stance on this debate when you get denied treatment for your cancer because your insurance company TORE THROUGH your medical records to find that you maybe ONCE didn't mention that you scraped your knee in the 11th grade. THAT is what some insurance companies call a "Pre-Existing Condition". And it's a reason to let you die.

How much money you have won't matter then.

I always wondered if there were people who when presented with the phrase "Your money or your life", chose the latter option. Now I know: Conservatives.
Cyber Saliva's avatar

Dapper Elder

6,550 Points
  • Forum Dabbler 200
  • Flatterer 200
  • Beta Gaian 0
Dostya
Cyber Saliva
Azur-emi
Interrobang2rd
... kids not being denied because of a p/e condition?

... not being dropped for getting sick?

... tax credits for small businesses?

... an exchange?

No, seriously? Will somebody please explain this to me?


Of course everyone wants it, but many against it are that way because they're thinking ahead, and not just saying things that sounds good.

For example, you might say, "People shouldn;t be denied because of a p/e condition"
However, if you thought about the consequences, you would know that if a law like that passed, then healthcare costs would go up because now the insurance companies have to cover more people. They're not going to take a loss in their profit gains, so they'll just raise prices to cover the difference.
The way that you worded things really don't make sense and can be used against you. For example,
Why are liberals...
...thinking that hard workers don't deserve all of their money?
...wanting people who do nothing, never went to school, aren't looking for a job, etc. receive money from those to do well?

Sorry, I'm really not the one for debating, but I hope you get my point haha

So you're saying your money is worth more than your life, basically.

Well, good luck with that one. I'd love to know your stance on this debate when you get denied treatment for your cancer because your insurance company TORE THROUGH your medical records to find that you maybe ONCE didn't mention that you scraped your knee in the 11th grade. THAT is what some insurance companies call a "Pre-Existing Condition". And it's a reason to let you die.

How much money you have won't matter then.

I always wondered if there were people who when presented with the phrase "Your money or your life", chose the latter option. Now I know: Conservatives.

People just allow themselves to be brainwashed. :[

Conservatives are always spewing some new BS to scaremonger support for their side, and that's all they ever do. Scaremongering. That is the only tactic I have seen them use in 10 years.
Just because something is cost efficient, doesn't make it right. Shouldn't doing what is morally right play into things as well as saving money?
Heimdalr's avatar

Mega Noob

fromthatshow
Just because something is cost efficient, doesn't make it right. Shouldn't doing what is morally right play into things as well as saving money?

Yes. We should really question the morality of forcing the people to get insurance, regardless of how the bill is going to reduce the deficit.
Inconsistent With Reality
fromthatshow
Just because something is cost efficient, doesn't make it right. Shouldn't doing what is morally right play into things as well as saving money?

Yes. We should really question the morality of forcing the people to get insurance, regardless of how the bill is going to reduce the deficit.


But you're OK with paying for someone else's ER costs? Many countries have a mandate, and you don't hear a peep. What's the problem here?
Heimdalr's avatar

Mega Noob

Interrobang2rd
Inconsistent With Reality
fromthatshow
Just because something is cost efficient, doesn't make it right. Shouldn't doing what is morally right play into things as well as saving money?

Yes. We should really question the morality of forcing the people to get insurance, regardless of how the bill is going to reduce the deficit.


But you're OK with paying for someone else's ER costs? Many countries have a mandate, and you don't hear a peep. What's the problem here?

I'd rather the entire health and pharmaceutical industry be run on a not-for-profit basis. If it has to be mandatory, it should be automatic. Not a commitment to spend money.
Intriguing's avatar

Magnetic Genius

6,550 Points
  • Ultimate Player 200
  • First step to fame 200
  • Tycoon 200
Interrobang2rd
Is there anybody on this board who can tell me why they support denying children coverage?

I was wondering the same thing, so it troubled me to see the Democrats vote against such a measure...

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jYnajhWrPEXihcCrpRNfUKN7rN-AD9EKTKIG0
Obama made better coverage for children a centerpiece of his health care remake, but it turns out the letter of the law provided a less-than-complete guarantee that kids with health problems would not be shut out of coverage.

Under the new law, insurance companies still would be able to refuse new coverage to children because of a pre-existing medical problem, said Karen Lightfoot, spokeswoman for the House Energy and Commerce Committee, one of the main congressional panels that wrote the bill Obama signed into law Tuesday.
Interrobang2rd
The way that you worded things really don't make sense and can be used against you. For example,
Why are liberals...
...thinking that hard workers don't deserve all of their money?
...wanting people who do nothing, never went to school, aren't looking for a job, etc. receive money from those to do well?
Shinapon's avatar

1,300 Points
  • Brandisher 100
  • Full closet 200
  • Signature Look 250
Aelmin
Interrobang2rd
The way that you worded things really don't make sense and can be used against you. For example,
Why are liberals...
...thinking that hard workers don't deserve all of their money?
...wanting people who do nothing, never went to school, aren't looking for a job, etc. receive money from those to do well?

Why do people...
...Think that everyone who has a lot of money actually worked for it?
...Not realise how difficult it is for many people to get by on the kinds of wages offered at most jobs here?
...Not understand that some people, good people, cannot even keep a job if their employers simply dislike them? (not to mention if they have actual disabilities that would make keeping a job impossible...)

It is rather hilarious that so many would put more faith in corporate cunts than in any legitimate governance. You think they're accountable to anyone but their share holders? The PR campaigns have fooled you and, even before that, fooled your government.
Shinapon
Aelmin
Interrobang2rd
The way that you worded things really don't make sense and can be used against you. For example,
Why are liberals...
...thinking that hard workers don't deserve all of their money?
...wanting people who do nothing, never went to school, aren't looking for a job, etc. receive money from those to do well?

Why do people...
...Think that everyone who has a lot of money actually worked for it?
...Not realise how difficult it is for many people to get by on the kinds of wages offered at most jobs here?
...Not understand that some people, good people, cannot even keep a job if their employers simply dislike them? (not to mention of they have actual disabilities that would make keeping a job impossible...)

It is rather hilarious that so many would put more faith in corporate cunts than in any legitimate governance. You think they're accountable to anyone but their share holders? The PR campaigns have fooled you and, even before that, fooled your government.


I didn't post that. I don't know why it is quoted to me.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games