Obamacare is passed.....let the outrage

[pbr87]

Hey Genius,

THEY EARNED IT. entrepreneurs do what most slackers like you won't do. SACRIFICE earlier so they can reward themselves as they get older. They work long hours, compromise their health, get into debt, sacrifice their time with their own family, take a lot of risks that people most close to them won't even consider all to forge a better life. WHY CAN't they enjoy the fruits of their labor?

If you have a problem with how capitalism works, go back to China or Russia before the mid 80's. They taxed 100% of all businesses, had universal healthcare, salary, everything! look at how prosperous ppl were back then... OH WAIT THEY WERENT. IT WAS FOR THAT REASON my family risked their lives to get out of CHINA, immigrate here, start a business to forge a future for themselves and the family. If you tax the hell out of businesses like my parents, where the hells is the justice in that?! you simply just spat on their sacrifice and hardships

Jesus H. Christ! Somebody call the wahmbulance!

By the way, I have personally met people who make 7 figures, and are in favor of a public healthcare option. Shit, even Bill Gates and Warren Buffet donate over 40% of their personal wealth to philanthropic causes.

Taxes pay for things that nobody wants to pay for, such as: military, police, roads.....and now public health care.

"Capitalism" is not synonomous with "greed". Just remember that.

[Hallen]

Jesus H. Christ! Somebody call the wahmbulance!

By the way, I have personally met people who make 7 figures, and are in favor of a public healthcare option. Shit, even Bill Gates and Warren Buffet donate over 40% of their personal wealth to philanthropic causes.

Taxes pay for things that nobody wants to pay for, such as: military, police, roads.....and now public health care.

"Capitalism" is not synonomous with "greed". Just remember that.

Wow, calling somebody extolling the virtues of the American dream a whiner is really lame. They just want what they worked for and earned. Paying taxes for necessary government functions (protection of property rights) is OK. Redistribution of wealth is not.

The reason people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet give away so much is for the tax benefit and because they CAN. It makes them feel good. There is nothing wrong with that and if I were as rich as them, you can be damned sure I would be donating tons of money to programs that I believe in. That doesn't change the fact that the money they have is just a drop in the bucket compared to the overall wealth and prosperity that they created through their careers. That's the reason its OK for them to have what they have.

Yes, a lot of people with money are in favor of the plan. They are liberals.
Seriously, some very intelligent people (many of my friends) buy off on this stuff of universal health care and even redistribution of wealth. They think that people are inherently evil and lazy and if the government didn't take from the rich and give to the poor, the poor would just starve and die. No amount of logic, facts, and proof will convince them otherwise. They have replaced faith in God with faith in the system. And that faith is just as unshakable, just as illogical, and just as unprovable as religion.

And then there is a "conservative" like me who believes that given a chance, most people are good and industrious. Sounds a bit backwards, doesn't it?

I'm sorry, but you misunderstand something. I happily pay taxes so that my government can have a standing army. I happily pay for police protection. I even happily pay for things like roads. There are things that with society the way it is, it is best to have the government do. However, those things are very limited and none of them involve health care or retirement pensions. I hate having money take just so the government can provide something to somebody who didn't pay any taxes. A hand up is OK. A hand out is retarded and only hurts the people you think you are helping.

People also misunderstand greed. It's a component of industriousness, motivation, and competition. It can be a good thing. Selfishness is bad. The two are not synonymous, yet people think they are.

And just exactly where do you draw the line on somebody being greedy? What is too much? Is it OK to own a private plane as long as it is not a jet? Is it OK to have a 5000 sq ft home or is 10,000 the limit? Just exactly where do we draw the line and have the government step in and start taking things away for greedy rich people?

[KenC]

I'm not very political, and I don't like to get tied up in these threads. This health care plan, though I only know the basics, is NOT for the better good. I am 21, working, and am paying for health care. I might not have the gold plated everything plan but that is my choice. To get to my small point, even before Obama (not really trying to support him) we live in a "socialist" country. A highly minimal "socialist" country but still one. I always hear socialism this and socialism that, a minimal amount of it is necessary. If this country was completely free enterprise the middle class would be virtually non-existant. I only hope that we can recover from something like this after Obama's term. I'm not saying fuck everyone but me but if the quality of health care drops, which it inevitably will because doctors are getting payed less, and the waiting list is extended to months and maybe years what will be the point. "Free" health care is no good to you if you are dead, nor is it good for you if the doctor does halfass work and you bleed to death afterward.

As one who is currently interviewing for acceptance to MD programs, I'm deeply offended that you would assume that a physician's compassion, effort, care would be related to compensation. Numerous current physicians that I've conversed with dont see the decrease in Medicare compensation as an issue as long as coverage is extended to more individuals.

[Holland]

As one who is currently interviewing for acceptance to MD programs, I'm deeply offended that you would assume that a physician's compassion, effort, care would be related to compensation. Numerous current physicians that I've conversed with dont see the decrease in Medicare compensation as an issue as long as coverage is extended to more individuals.

That's good to know, I suppose it's because most people don't care about their jobs. I work with a few people who have had their pay cut and put considerably less effort into their work.

[rwh11385]

Damn, and I recently enrolled into a private health insurance option... Obama was going to take care of me for free.


*rolls eyes*

[Ryan Stewart]

The kind you can get if you never use it.
Wait till something happens and your bills are suddenly $260/month.

This "80% of Americans are happy with their current insurance" line is total bullshit. It's like voting, you pick the least horrible option.

This entire post was moronic.

Not only do I have health insurance but I have used it and my bill isnt $260 a month. I also have a g/f with a pre-existing condition that is covered. Not only that but her $1400/mo drug is fucking free, she doesnt even have to pay shipping.

Fuck that evil medical industry!!! :hitler:

[pbr87]

Wow, calling somebody extolling the virtues of the American dream a whiner is really lame.

"extolling" is waaayyyy too big a word for my simpleton vocabulary to comprehend.

They just want what they worked for and earned. Paying taxes for necessary government functions (protection of property rights) is OK. Redistribution of wealth is not.

"redistribution"? The only government program that literally redistributes wealth is the welfare program. Also, I will have you know that I am an opponent of the welfare program. Public health care is NOT "wealth redistribution".


Also.....just saying, what if "they" didn't work for or earn it?
What if it was given to them?

The reason people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet give away so much is for the tax benefit and because they CAN. It makes them feel good. There is nothing wrong with that and if I were as rich as them, you can be damned sure I would be donating tons of money to programs that I believe in.

That doesn't change the fact that the money they have is just a drop in the bucket compared to the overall wealth and prosperity that they created through their careers. That's the reason its OK for them to have what they have.

Over 40% is "just a drop in the bucket" ?
?que?

Yes, a lot of people with money are in favor of the plan. They are liberals.

Alot of people are against it. They are conservatives (sarcasm....you fail....you are obviously the type of person that classifies anyone you disagree with politically, as a "liberal").

Seriously, some very intelligent people (many of my friends) buy off on this stuff of universal health care and even redistribution of wealth.

Again, where are you getting "redistribution of wealth" from? This seems to be a recurrent phrase among upper-middle class people who don't want to pay their taxes.

They think that people are inherently evil and lazy and if the government didn't take from the rich and give to the poor, the poor would just starve and die.

They might. But that's probably okay with you. People such as yourself just see things like starvation as "population control".

No amount of logic, facts, and proof will convince them otherwise. They have replaced faith in God with faith in the system. And that faith is just as unshakable, just as illogical, and just as unprovable as religion.

Because faith in God is paramount to all of course, right? For such a conservative, you don't seem to believe much at all in separation of church and state. Surprising, really.

And then there is a "conservative" like me who believes that given a chance, most people are good and industrious. Sounds a bit backwards, doesn't it?

What about people who don't have a "chance", such as impoverished children? According to you, they should starve to death.

I'm sorry, but you misunderstand something. I happily pay taxes so that my government can have a standing army.

You pay for your government to defend you, but also to kill people.

I happily pay for police protection.

You pay for your government to defend you, but also to lock people in cages.

I even happily pay for things like roads.

Happily?
Really?
Doubtful.

There are things that with society the way it is, it is best to have the government do. However, those things are very limited and none of them involve health care or retirement pensions. I hate having money take just so the government can provide something to somebody who didn't pay any taxes. A hand up is OK. A hand out is retarded and only hurts the people you think you are helping.

So, basically, if someone who can't afford $3,000/year health insurance develops cancer, they should just die, because it's their fault, right?

People also misunderstand greed. It's a component of industriousness, motivation, and competition. It can be a good thing. Selfishness is bad. The two are not synonymous, yet people think they are.

And just exactly where do you draw the line on somebody being greedy? What is too much? Is it OK to own a private plane as long as it is not a jet? Is it OK to have a 5000 sq ft home or is 10,000 the limit? Just exactly where do we draw the line and have the government step in and start taking things away for greedy rich people?

I "draw the line" when people say that the public healthcare option is "redistribution of wealth". It is not. The public health option is meant to insure that all Americans have access to quality healthcare, which is a very important aspect of the American way of life that even conservatives such as yourself claim to hold dear to their hearts.

[assoutE12]

This entire post was moronic.

Not only do I have health insurance but I have used it and my bill isnt $260 a month. I also have a g/f with a pre-existing condition that is covered. Not only that but her $1400/mo drug is fucking free, she doesnt even have to pay shipping.

Fuck that evil medical industry!!! :hitler:

I was in your glorious airport the other day, one of you native sideways walkers took up half my seat for the 2 hour trip to cayman. I really considered watching porn on my laptop to make her as uncomfortable a I was, in retrospect I definitely should have. fucking fatty was more exited to get her snack than to arrive at a caribbean island.

[pbr87]

I was in your glorious airport the other day, one of you native sideways walkers took up half my seat for the 2 hour trip to cayman. I really considered watching porn on my laptop to make her as uncomfortable a I was, in retrospect I definitely should have. fucking fatty was more exited to get her snack than to arrive at a caribbean island.

^ I lol'd. Srsly.

[Ryan Stewart]

I was in your glorious airport the other day, one of you native sideways walkers took up half my seat for the 2 hour trip to cayman. I really considered watching porn on my laptop to make her as uncomfortable a I was, in retrospect I definitely should have. fucking fatty was more exited to get her snack than to arrive at a caribbean island.

Pron is all good but it can get you in trouble.

What I do is watch an episode of Dexter while rubbing my crotch and moaning during the gory scenes.

[assoutE12]

thats a good idea, I'll try that next time. I did eat a roast beef sandwich in right when I boarded the plane, i could tell she was foaming at the mouth. I miss seeing your car around randomly.

[markseven]

Your ignorance of how things work is shameful. I blame it on public education, MTV, and too easy of a life.

Qft

[stegosaurus]

Probably the most controversial bill of the year and they sneak the vote in at 1AM the weekend of a snow storm that dropped 38" in DC. Nice, real nice.

I wouldn't piss on Obama if he was on fire.

[Massive Lee]

Probably the most controversial bill of the year and they sneak the vote in at 1AM the weekend of a snow storm that dropped 38" in DC. Nice, real nice.

Nop. The most controversal bill of the past 40 years, right after the bill ending segregation. Would you believe some people were against that bill too? What do yout think of segregation now? As for Medicaid, the Dems were simply waiting to get the 60th support vote from senator Ben Nelson to make it happen. And it happened on Saturday night. Just a coincidence. 30 million poor Americans are now covered. And insurance cannot refuse medical support on the simple premise that the condition was pre existent.

From a UK source

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1237469/U-S-Senate-passes-Obamas-health-care--providing-cover-30million-poor-Americans.html

[mrsleeve]

LEE you again fail. The dems were not waiting to get support they were throwing bids at nelson to see what his price was and they found it, nothing more noting less, much like they did with many of the moderates and others that were on the fence. All of them bought off with sweet heart deals and BILLIONS in ear marks and hold backs, brokered in countless closed door meetings and off the record dealings. HEY DEMS wheres all that transparency you talked about and ran on????

2 This dose not mean the damm thing is passed, this just means they can now bring this damnation of a bill the the official floor vote to pass it through the senate. Then it will have to be merged with the house bill to the point where both houses can agree on a common bill and again pass both chambers.

Lastly those "30 million" (mostly illegal's ,<----- read: well over 75% of that 30mil are) will not see one Iota of reformed coverage for at least 4 years while the rest of us start paying for it all now with all the new taxes to be levied. This whole sham is like going to buy a car that you dont like, but still have to make payments on it for 4 years before you even see the damm thing.

here this may help you understand

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ

Nop. The most controversal bill of the past 40 years, right after the bill ending segregation. Would you believe some people were against that bill too? What do yout think of segregation now? As for Medicaid, the Dems were simply waiting to get the 60th support vote from senator Ben Nelson to make it happen. And it happened on Saturday night. Just a coincidence. 30 million poor Americans are now covered. And insurance cannot refuse medical support on the simple premise that the condition was pre existent.

From a UK source
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...Americans.html