It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Public Outraged Teens Let Disabled Man die

page: 3
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

I'm not sure the analogy is apt. When healthcare and saving lives is the job of the government, it is usually because the people refuse to do it themselves.




posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: uwontbelievethis


Funny, you can't see the comparison of a bunch of idiot kids laughing while a disable man, crying for help, drowns and our Idiot in Chief, Trump, threatening to defund ACA guaranteed insurance subsidies, for the purpose of "letting ObamaCare die" and refusing to "own" the results of those who "drown" in the aftermath!



Why throw money at something that's failing?



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


I think it's an "Am I my brother's keeper" question. It wasn't the job of the teenagers to save the disabled man, but most would say it would have been the right thing to do.

Ironically, they would have been hailed as heroes and been plastered all over the news as exemplary citizens, had they chosen to help the man. Now, they are villains that committed no real crime. Do something, don't do something, fate can change on a dime.

If Trump decides to forego payment, the quality of many folk's lives may turn on a dime.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: uwontbelievethis


Funny, you can't see the comparison of a bunch of idiot kids laughing while a disable man, crying for help, drowns and our Idiot in Chief, Trump, threatening to defund ACA guaranteed insurance subsidies, for the purpose of "letting ObamaCare die" and refusing to "own" the results of those who "drown" in the aftermath!



Why throw money at something that's failing?



Because, people are not lost causes.

Again, the teenagers thought the disabled man was a "lost cause" because he was stupid enough to wander out, beyond a safe point.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


I think it's an "Am I my brother's keeper" question. It wasn't the job of the teenagers to save the disabled man, but most would say it would have been the right thing to do.

Ironically, they would have been hailed as heroes and been plastered all over the news as exemplary citizens, had they chosen to help the man. Now, they are villains that committed no real crime. Do something, don't do something, fate can change on a dime.

If Trump decides to forego payment, the quality of many folk's lives may turn on a dime.



So if doing the right thing means cutting your own throat, does that make it right?

How about accepting refugees because it's the right thing to do, and yet they destroy their host country because the simply are parasites who's sole intention is to invade?

Total lack of logical thinking on your part to promote your political agenda.

Obamacare is failing, and those of you who supported it as a religion are gasping for air. The Democrats and those who supported Obamacare own this mess, no one else! I wonder how many people died due to Obamacare?
edit on 23-7-2017 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 04:41 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963


While standing on the shore and mocking a person in need is a safer stance than attempting a rescue, not doing so is certain death for the person in need.

One the other hand, whose throat would have been cut if one of those teen went into the water and saved that man's life? Whose throat gets cut by Trump making the monthly ACA guaranteed payment to the insurance companies?


edit on 23-7-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


When healthcare and saving lives is the job of the government, it is usually because the people refuse to do it themselves.

When I was in boot camp, there was a course that I took in first aid; how to distinguish collapsed lung from sucking, frothing chest wounds. Later, while in the coarse of my military job, a subordinate asked for my help in breaking loose a rather tight nut. He managed to have his face rather close when the nut broke free and the wrench smacked him in the mouth, breaking one tooth and loosening two others.

I called the expeditor on the radio to take him to the hospital for emergency dental work.

In either instance; gunshot wound to the chest or workplace mishap, the saving or the fixing is beyond the capability of self-help. And military medicine is single payer, which benefits dependents also.
edit on 23-7-2017 by pthena because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 05:33 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Doing nothing is also a choice. Crime or not, in this case they chose to let a man die, much like many choose to do nothing when their family, friends, neighbors, and fellow community members become ill. They would rather it be the duty of someone else.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: windword



makes good on his threat to "defund" insurance company subsidies,

They were not getting the subsidies as promised under the ACA . Thats the reason they are jumping ship .

Youre not from around here , er ya ?



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

WTF does the spectacle of a disabled man drowning have to do with national health care?

Suck-a** smilies, so insert PUZZLED LOOK here.

Incredibly lame segue.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog


The role of cost-sharing reduction payments in the ACA legislative scheme

The CSRs are an essential element of the ACA’s program for making affordable health insurance and health care available to low and moderate-income Americans. The ACA offers these individuals premium tax credits (APTC) to help make insurance affordable; these are offered through the tax system and are funded through a permanent appropriation for tax refunds. But the silver (70 percent actuarial value) plans whose premiums set the benchmark for premium tax credits are high cost-sharing plans. The average deductible for an individual in 2016 is over $3,000. For many low-income Americans, the deductibles and coinsurance imposed by these plans would leave health care unaffordable without additional assistance.
To make health care affordable, the ACA requires insurers to reduce cost sharing for individuals and families with incomes below 250 percent of poverty. CSRs work in two ways. First, they reduce the out-of-pocket maximum, the most that an individual or family has to pay for in-network services before the insurer takes over all costs. For 2016, the maximum out of pocket for an individual is $6,850, but for an individual with an income up to 200 percent of poverty it is reduced to $2,250. (For families, out-of-pocket maximums are twice these amounts.)



You can thank Republicans for that hold up.


Cost Sharing Reduction Reimbursement Uncertainty: As I've written about endlessly (especially over the past few months), CSR reimbursements are legally owed to insurance carriers which have people earning 100-250% FPL enrolled in Silver plans. The amount varies widely by enrollee, plan, carrier and state, but it's expected to add up to something like $8 billion or so next year. CSR payments are embroiled in a federal lawsuit brought by the House Republican caucus itself, and could potentially be cut off at pretty much any time if Donald Trump instructs the Department of Justice to drop its appeal of the case.

The whole mess could be made to go away in about 5 minutes if Congressional Republicans were to pass a simple 64-word bill formally appropriating the payments, and Trump keeps publicly threatening to stop CSR payments this year (month after month) in an attempt to bully the Democrats into playing ball. The insurance carriers are required to cover the CSR costs for every enrollee who qualifies for them regardless of whether they're actually reimbursed for their expenses the following month or not. Since the carriers obviously have no intention of eating such a loss, they're responding in one of two ways: Some are dropping out of the individual market altogether, while most are simply jacking up their rates dramatically to cover the potential CSR reimbursement loss.


SOURCE
SOURCE
MORE

Trump and the Republican are using these "cost sharing payments" as leverage to coerce Democrats into betraying their constituents. If Trump follows through, millions of people's lives will be affected. Trump and his Republican cronies might just as well be those teenagers laughing at a disabled man drowning.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 06:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: 123143
a reply to: windword

WTF does the spectacle of a disabled man drowning have to do with national health care?

Suck-a** smilies, so insert PUZZLED LOOK here.

Incredibly lame segue.


It's not the "spectacle of a disabled man drowning. It the "spectacle" of spectators watching and laughing at the man and doing nothing to help as a disabled man drowns.
edit on 23-7-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2017 @ 08:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: 123143
a reply to: windword

WTF does the spectacle of a disabled man drowning have to do with national health care?

Suck-a** smilies, so insert PUZZLED LOOK here.

Incredibly lame segue.


It's not the "spectacle of a disabled man drowning. It the "spectacle" of spectators watching and laughing at the man and doing nothing to help as a disabled man drowns.


That is basically what I meant to say and failed to do so.

I still don't see the connection between that and national health care.



posted on Jul, 24 2017 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: 123143



I still don't see the connection between that and national health care.


The spectators on shore laughing at a drowning are not representative of the ACA or the American public. The public is outraged by the teenagers' behavior.

No, the spectators are representative of President Trump and his cronies, who found a way to "kill ObamaCare", allowing millions of individuals and their families to "drown".....laughing all the way.


edit on 24-7-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2017 @ 09:55 AM
link   
TL;DR

Trump smokes meth then drowns down syndrome baby seal while kids laugh and smoke MJ while not signing up for ACA because Trump said he would kill them if they did.

..right?



posted on Jul, 24 2017 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Butterfinger


Trump exploits a loop hole in the ACA and tries to use to millions of individuals' and their families' wellbeing as leverage to impose his very mean and very bad health care plan. Either way, if Congress repeals the ACA or if Trump guts it by refusing to reimburse insurance companies, people will die and families will drown in financial ruin, while Trump and his cronies laugh!



posted on Jul, 24 2017 @ 02:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: 123143



I still don't see the connection between that and national health care.


The spectators on shore laughing at a drowning are not representative of the ACA or the American public. The public is outraged by the teenagers' behavior.

No, the spectators are representative of President Trump and his cronies, who found a way to "kill ObamaCare", allowing millions of individuals and their families to "drown".....laughing all the way.



That has got to be one of the stupidest analogies I've heard in my life.



posted on Jul, 24 2017 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: 123143


You're right. It's way worse. Those idiot teens didn't have a plan to drown the man, they merely did nothing to help. Trump has a plan that will, in fact, kill people and cause people and their families to drown in financial ruin.







 
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join