The truth about Obamacare Approval rating

reply to post by ArtemisE


Obama ran on the Aca. The majority of his base does benefit from it. Some higher income and self employee people took hits.... But for the most part the people who voted for him and me the Aca is a positive.


Without insurance companies were at single payer.... Where the dems wanna go anyway. In today's society where we change jobs a lot, your health care being tied to your job is no longer logical for the vast majority.


I didn't mean you wanted all social programs stopped.... I was just saying even if they did. Do you really think they would pass the savings on to us normal folk.... IMHO no chance. They'll just keep it.


The last part what I ment was. I think the biggest lie ever told is that most of gov. Waste is on social programs. I'm sure the same politicians and contractors who complain about the welfare state are making millions to billions ripping us off. I'm not fooled into thinking the 10k a year this or that welfare queen is beating the system for is a drop in the bucket compared to the backroom deals, that we will never hear about, where tax payers are taken for billions.... I was pointing out that while I bet it cost 3 million every time congress or the senate have lunch togather. They complain about the welfare queen scemeing 500 a month off food stamps. While there eating a 1000 a plate lunch on the same tab...tax payers.

you even spaced it out, to make room for replies...how thoughtful

ArtemisE
reply to post by ArtemisE

 

Obama ran on the Aca. The majority of his base does benefit from it. Some higher income and self employee people took hits.... But for the most part the people who voted for him and me the Aca is a positive.

ok, then who is his base? who voted for him? and don't worry, i'm not trying to goad you into saying something "racist", so i can beat you over the head with it.....facts are facts, i don't do politically correct BS..

if the ACA was so grand, and wonderful, why do so many people hate it, why is it receiving so much bad press(by way of reports of people losing their coverage, coverage being more expensive, etc), and why are enrollment figures so low? if it's SUPERAWESOME™, wouldn't EVERYONE wanna sign up for it yesterday?

Without insurance companies were at single payer.... Where the dems wanna go anyway. In today's society where we change jobs a lot, your health care being tied to your job is no longer logical for the vast majority.

i disagree....if they wanted crowdfunded universal medical services, then that's the bill they would have drafted, and passed...instead they passed a bill written by the very companies that stand to benefit the most from it's passage, without even reading the goddamn thing.....and now, even after it's become painfully obvious that it was a turd wrapped in cotton candy, they just make up excuses, and defend it, instead of admitting they were wrong to have passed it without reading it....they tell us that the people negatively impacted by it are liars, and that the site's not broken, we must just not know how to use the internet properly, despite the fact that almost EVERYONE has a facebook.....they tell us that if we can't afford it, we must be crap at managing our money...it's always OUR fault, when they fail... they need a lesson in personal responsibility....

I didn't mean you wanted all social programs stopped.... I was just saying even if they did. Do you really think they would pass the savings on to us normal folk.... IMHO no chance. They'll just keep it.

oh, ok, completely agreed...the greedy bastards, lol

The last part what I ment was. I think the biggest lie ever told is that most of gov. Waste is on social programs. I'm sure the same politicians and contractors who complain about the welfare state are making millions to billions ripping us off. I'm not fooled into thinking the 10k a year this or that welfare queen is beating the system for is a drop in the bucket compared to the backroom deals, that we will never hear about, where tax payers are taken for billions.... I was pointing out that while I bet it cost 3 million every time congress or the senate have lunch togather. They complain about the welfare queen scemeing 500 a month off food stamps. While there eating a 1000 a plate lunch on the same tab...tax payers.

alright, gotcha.....and while i agree, while statistically, the the united welfare queens of america might not be breaking the bank quite as badly as taxpayer funded luncheons and junkets, and bribes, and all that other nonsense, it can't be written off as inconsequential....don't even get me started on how broken SNAP(foodstamps) is.....it's supposed to be for real food, not goddamn dorritos, candy bars, and hostess pies....

but A LOT of waste IS on "social programs"....there's far too much waste, fraud, and abuse, but they don't care, becuase it's not their money, and there will always be more...until that changes, or we kick all these crooks out, i wouldn't expect to see anything done about it...it'll keep getting worse, until we end up like russia, and balkanise after the union dissolves, or worse, we'll end up a third-world hellhole like parts of africa...and the world will either sit back and laugh, because we earned it, or they'll take turns invading, to finish us off, because we earned it....

The American people will render their decision on Obama and Obama-care in the mid-term elections in November.

reply to post by Daedalus


I think most everyone is cool with means testing. I think we do kinda incentive not working, but the GOP isn't offering a fix. There offering cuts. I would means test then expand.

For easy math.

Say we give any non worker 400 a month. Well I would give 300 to those at the bottom income levels. That way you live better the more you work. While making sure that when there's crime, it's criminals not the hungry. Maybe let the working one spend there's on more comfort foods. While restricting the non workers to only food you gotta cook.

But that's not what there offering.

reply to post by rickynews


Liberals are lazy in an off election year. Almost No one will vote watch.

If we were all required to vote the GOP wouldn't stand a chance.

ArtemisE
reply to post by Daedalus

 

I think most everyone is cool with means testing. I think we do kinda incentive not working, but the GOP isn't offering a fix. There offering cuts. I would means test then expand.

For easy math.

Say we give any non worker 400 a month. Well I would give 300 to those at the bottom income levels. That way you live better the more you work. While making sure that when there's crime, it's criminals not the hungry. Maybe let the working one spend there's on more comfort foods. While restricting the non workers to only food you gotta cook.

But that's not what there offering.

or how about we just fix the rules, so that the program does what it was originally intended to do(allow struggling americans afford nutritious food, and not junk food), stop making it easier, and more comfortable to not work, and use proper spelling and grammar(see what i did there? ;p)?

reply to post by Daedalus


Because in my opinion we need a safety net even for the useless. They've all ways been here and always will be. Plus min wage can't pay for yourself. Not a family....just you. That's insane. You can't have min wage less then it cost to survive.

Oh and welfare is cheaper and better on society then prison. It's 40k per person per year to incarcerate... Not including damage to the kids of parents who would be there if they weren't jailed.

reply to post by Daedalus


If that was a shot at my spelling and grammer. Better teachers they you have tried to fix that.....all failed miserably! :p

Daedalus
you even spaced it out, to make room for replies...how thoughtful

if the ACA was so grand, and wonderful, why do so many people hate it, why is it receiving so much bad press(by way of reports of people losing their coverage, coverage being more expensive, etc), and why are enrollment figures so low? if it's SUPERAWESOME™, wouldn't EVERYONE wanna sign up for it yesterday?

ACA was a compromise that was designed after the program the Romney administration set up in his home state. This model was picked because many conservatives championed similar plans in the 90's, in fact Republican leadership was very keen on the idea back in the day because it maintained the private market and DID NOT INSTITUTE a public option because they feared it would impact the entire health insurance industry which employs a great number of people. If the industry failed to compete with a public option which was the Democratic proposal, it would likely signal a growth in government as people abandoned the private market for a universal alternative. This would in turn hurt the producers, earners, makers, or elites, whatever you wanna call them.

In fact the leader of the Heritage Foundation during the 90's had this notion that became very popular with conservatives

In 1989, Stuart M. Butler of the conservative Heritage Foundation came up with a plan that would “mandate all households to obtain adequate insurance.”

i disagree....if they wanted crowdfunded universal medical services, then that's the bill they would have drafted, and passed...instead they passed a bill written by the very companies that stand to benefit the most from it's passage, without even reading the goddamn thing.....and now, even after it's become painfully obvious that it was a turd wrapped in cotton candy, they just make up excuses, and defend it, instead of admitting they were wrong to have passed it without reading it....they tell us that the people negatively impacted by it are liars, and that the site's not broken, we must just not know how to use the internet properly, despite the fact that almost EVERYONE has a facebook.....they tell us that if we can't afford it, we must be crap at managing our money...it's always OUR fault, when they fail... they need a lesson in personal responsibility....

Most Democrats did want the public option, but that would have been a nearly impossible political lift. You can read in this article from before it's passage which indicates that the president did initially want have a public option.

www.newsmax.com...

Republicans indicated that they would REJECT any such notion as a public option.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Senate Finance Committee on Tuesday rejected two amendments to include a government-run public health insurance option in the only compromise health care bill so far.
Sen. Max Baucus said the public option provision would "hold back meaningful reform this year."

Sen. Max Baucus said the public option provision would "hold back meaningful reform this year."

The amendments by Democratic Sens. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia and Charles Schumer of New York were opposed by all 10 Republicans on the committee and a few Democrats

www.cnn.com...

ACA was designed to get some conservative or Republicans on board because it maintained the private market and did not introduce a public option. Some Republicans indicated that a proposal like the ACA would be much more palatable than the Democratic proposals.

But once the bill made it through the process and politics came into play, the GOP realized that opposing the bill would be a better way to regain political power than to hand the new president such a massive political victory. Initially the opposition to Obamacare was based upon political calculation, but it grew into a trend all its own.

That sounds like the Liberals problem.

reply to post by rickynews


How very democratic of you lmao.

reply to post by ArtemisE


In other words Scumbag Leeches Supported Obama and the ACA . Low Lives who Contribute absolutely Nothing to our Economy . Thanks for Clearing that up ..........

Why did Democrats reject this ???

United States National Health Care Act

ArtemisE
Because in my opinion we need a safety net even for the useless. They've all ways been here and always will be.

that would depend on how you define "useless"...i'm thinking you're talking the people that just refuse to work, or whatever....i call them "lazy"

we don't need a safety net for the useless....people can go get a job, and earn their way, or they can stay with friends, or family, or whoever else is willing to support them.....failing that, they can pay the price for their refusal to act...

it's not the government's job to take care of those too lazy to take care of themselves...

now, support for disability, or things like this....that's something different.

if you're crippled(missing limbs, mangled limbs, brain injury, physically debilitating condition, etc), you obviously can't work. if you're mentally retarded, your options are as limited as your mental functionality...it only seems decent to help THESE people.

social security was created to pay for people's cost of living when they became too old....kind of like a government-funded retirement plan...but it's all screwed to hell, yet we keep paying into it..in any event, a program like that is even a good idea....as long as it's voluntary.

and unemployment assistance is even a good idea on paper...but it's too easy to abuse..

but if you're able-bodied, and not decrepit, and you're refusing to work? screw you..you get nothing.....why should money i work hard for, go to subsidizing the life of someone who refuses to earn their own way?....in other words, why should i sacrifice my wants, that i earned, to secure their availability to those who did not..

Plus min wage can't pay for yourself. Not a family....just you. That's insane. You can't have min wage less then it cost to survive.

that entirely depends upon where you are...but i would agree, minimum wage does pay less than current basic cost of living....in most places...but that's where a second job comes in..

it's not the government's place to augment people's s**tty pay, with other people's money...

Oh and welfare is cheaper and better on society then prison. It's 40k per person per year to incarcerate... Not including damage to the kids of parents who would be there if they weren't jailed.

why would they be in prison?

ArtemisE
If that was a shot at my spelling and grammer. Better teachers they you have tried to fix that.....all failed miserably! :p

was very tongue-in-cheek, my friend.....but fair enough, lol

reply to post by Zanti Misfit


I don't know how they convinced conservatives that liberals are evil Muslim leaches who want to destroy America. Lol

We make up the majority of the population assuming the income levels that don't vote continue the demographics of those who do. So if the majority of the people here are evil. Shouldn't y'all leave???? Oh right.. It's only Muslim countries that Conservative party is in power.

The truth is that most of us are in the middle. The reason I go left and not right. Is because the only thing you ever get from the GOP is " I shouldn't have to pay for that" and "the bible told me to". I prefer for the side I back to at least try and improve society. None of us political junkies could even tell you what there plans are...besides cutting things. There not offering to add anything.

reply to post by Daedalus


Some people have no one. No family, no friends. It would be almost impossible to start from being homeless with no phone and make it. Plus the actual usless ones will still be here even if we cut all there social programs. If there still here and not getting food stamps then that means they have to turn to crime to survive. At that point we pay 40k per year per person to house them. When 400 a month in food stamps and they take care of themselves the rest of the way.

reply to post by ArtemisE


About the minimums wage thing. IMHO it makes no since to have minimum wage so low that the concensus full work week won't cover just you. This is what I mean by turning us into China's work force.....the hours americans work keeps increasing while the money we make keeps decreasing.

reply to post by ArtemisE


About the minimums wage thing. IMHO it makes no since to have minimum wage so low that the concensus full work week won't cover just you. This is what I mean by turning us into China's work force.....the hours americans work keeps increasing while the money we make keeps decreasing.

ArtemisE
reply to post by Daedalus

 

Some people have no one. No family, no friends. It would be almost impossible to start from being homeless with no phone and make it. Plus the actual usless ones will still be here even if we cut all there social programs. If there still here and not getting food stamps then that means they have to turn to crime to survive. At that point we pay 40k per year per person to house them. When 400 a month in food stamps and they take care of themselves the rest of the way.

OR, when they choose to turn to crime, we let the citizens carrying guns kill them in self defense...

u could start from homeless, with no phone and make it....often times, they don't WANT to.....obviously smelling bad, and having ratty clothes is a drag, but panhandling pays ok, and you don't hafta pay taxes, or worry about most of the same crap you and i do....it's a much more free life....who the hell would WANT to go back to the confines of "normal life"?

obviously, not all homeless people stay homeless by choice, but for a portion of them, it's freedom, and a damn good hustle..

ArtemisE
reply to post by ArtemisE

 

About the minimums wage thing. IMHO it makes no since to have minimum wage so low that the concensus full work week won't cover just you. This is what I mean by turning us into China's work force.....the hours americans work keeps increasing while the money we make keeps decreasing.

which is why the cost of living needs to decrease....the minimum wage is not the problem..it's the cost of everything that you need to be able to purchase with that minimum wage...

there used to be a time when you could support just yourself on minimum, but over time the price of things has skyrocketed, and the value of the dollar has decreased, so now we have a situation where cost exceeds revenue, and there are very few ways to remedy that....the majority of which, require that you work so hard, and so long, that you no longer have any time left to do anything with any extra money you might have....at that point you are working to pay the bills, and nothing else.

that's not living, that existing.