Heh. Obama really stepped in it with this white cop.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I am just trying to understand the diabolical plot you have uncovered for him to destroy this country. I apologize for suggesting something so crazy as the Canadians taking us over! Your diabolical plot is clearly more rational than that. Does it involve the Mexicans taking us over? Of COURSE! That's why you guys always want us to build a wall! Man- you have really thought ahead on this one. I feel like a monkey playing chess with Kasparov. You are at least 12 steps ahead. Curse you Obama!

You really are an asshole, aren't you?

Obama is a socialist. You smugly tell me that I don't know what socialism is, but I think it's because you're a socialist yourself and you can't admit it.

GM is now state owned.

Obamacare is socialized medicine. Did you miss the part that privatized insurance will become illegal or did you just ignore it? It's right there in the bill. Scroll down to Sec. 102 and read it for yourself under Limitation on New Enrollment:

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3200/text

And just how is he going to pay for it without skyrocketing tax increases for every citizen? Even you have to admit that he's lying about only taxing the wealthy to pay for socialized medicine. Unless, of course, you don't mind lying to yourself.

That's just a start. Open your eyes and stop being so damned condescending when you respond to my posts. Nobody but you is impressed by your snide remarks.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

You really are an asshole, aren't you?

Just a suggestion, il Pad: don't feed the troll. Take it from a repeat troll-feeding offender.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

You really are an asshole, aren't you?

Obama is a socialist. You smugly tell me that I don't know what socialism is, but I think it's because you're a socialist yourself and you can't admit it.

I tell you that you don't know what socialism is because you don't.

GM is now state owned.

Are you under the impression that the entire US economy is now socialistic because the US owns a controlling share of GM (which they are trying to unload, just as they have already unloaded large portions of ownership of several banks, such as US Bank)? Once again, proof you don't know what socialism means.

Obamacare is socialized medicine. Did you miss the part that privatized insurance will become illegal or did you just ignore it? It's right there in the bill. Scroll down to Sec. 102 and read it for yourself under Limitation on New Enrollment:

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3200/text

More proof you don't know what socialism means, and proof you don't know what the bill says (hint: it doesn't say private insurance is illegal- you actually can read Sec. 102 instead of just recommending other people read it, and you can also note that the bill hasn't been passed and no particular provision of that bill has been endorsed by Obama).

And just how is he going to pay for it without skyrocketing tax increases for every citizen? Even you have to admit that he's lying about only taxing the wealthy to pay for socialized medicine. Unless, of course, you don't mind lying to yourself.

Well, according to the CBO, he very well can pay for it through a tax on the top 1% (which is what he said he would do all along). He could also pay for it by taxing health care benefits, which is what he said he wouldn't do all along. I prefer the latter to the former, but both produce revenue neutrality for the bill.

That's just a start. Open your eyes and stop being so damned condescending when you respond to my posts. Nobody but you is impressed by your snide remarks.

I hope that is also the end, because it was a miserable start.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I tell you that you don't know what socialism is because you don't.



Are you under the impression that the entire US economy is now socialistic because the US owns a controlling share of GM (which they are trying to unload, just as they have already unloaded large portions of ownership of several banks, such as US Bank)? Once again, proof you don't know what socialism means.



More proof you don't know what socialism means, and proof you don't know what the bill says (hint: it doesn't say private insurance is illegal- you actually can read Sec. 102 instead of just recommending other people read it, and you can also note that the bill hasn't been passed and no particular provision of that bill has been endorsed by Obama).



Well, according to the CBO, he very well can pay for it through a tax on the top 1% (which is what he said he would do all along). He could also pay for it by taxing health care benefits, which is what he said he wouldn't do all along. I prefer the latter to the former, but both produce revenue neutrality for the bill.



I hope that is also the end, because it was a miserable start.

Despite your protestations, I know what socialism is. It's obvious that you haven't a clue about it.

I read Section 102. Did you miss the part that said that if one decides to switch to another private insurance company or starts a new job after the 1st year of the program is implemented that they have no choice but to enroll in the government program? Or did you just ignore it and think I'm not capable of reading and understanding what is written?

I'll grant your wish that this is the end.

Fuck you. Fuck your wife and kids. Fuck your parents. Fuck your grandparents. Fuck your in-laws. Fuck your work associates. Fuck your neighbors. Fuck everyone that is in your life that you care about.

You are a condescending shit-for-brained Obama fellating asswipe who suffers from a superiority complex. You are everything that is wrong with the world today.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Despite your protestations, I know what socialism is. It's obvious that you haven't a clue about it.

I read Section 102. Did you miss the part that said that if one decides to switch to another private insurance company or starts a new job after the 1st year of the program is implemented that they have no choice but to enroll in the government program? Or did you just ignore it and think I'm not capable of reading and understanding what is written?

I'll grant your wish that this is the end.

Fuck you. Fuck your wife and kids. Fuck your parents. Fuck your grandparents. Fuck your in-laws. Fuck your work associates. Fuck your neighbors. Fuck everyone that is in your life that you care about.

You are a condescending shit-for-brained Obama fellating asswipe who suffers from a superiority complex. You are everything that is wrong with the world today.

Ha! I feel like I just took a time machine back to first grade, except that in this time machine, a not-funny version of George Carlin is teaching the class. Grow up.

As for Section 102, there is absolutely nothing in the language that makes private health insurance illegal. Honestly- highlight the language that you think says it will be illegal. Alternatively, highlight language that says if you switch jobs you must purchase government insurance (which was your second argument- please note that even if this were the case, private insurance would STILL not be illegal as you initially claimed). When you can't locate that language, feel free to come back and apologize.

[RedHeadGal]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Going to the "I'd like to see how you would react" card, eh? That doesn't work.

Obama opened his mouth when he shouldn't have and his true self shone through.

I wasn't playing any card at all, and I was speaking more literally than rhetorically. What I meant is that it seems Gates's reaction was understandable, and I would expect many in his situation to react with anger and frustration (as I understand the facts in this case). I can particularly imagine such a reaction from the more libertarian, gun(g)-ho 2nd amendment types. All of which I say in a nonjudgmental way anyway.

I wasn't commenting on Obama's remarks (which I realize are the subject of this thread) because I don't really care what he said. This topic is useful if we want to discuss race relations, but the political ramifications for Obama is a detour not relevant to that discussion.

[RedHeadGal]

Re the socialism points, I will say I have an in at CBO in the health division, and every time this topic comes up I hear about how current proposals are not socialism. I hear it explained like this (this is not my interpretation, but that of my CBO source):

No serious congressional proposal envisions anything close to socialized medicine. The senate and house proposals are quite similar; they would give subsidies to people with low incomes to purchase PRIVATE coverage (such as Aetna, United Health Plan, Cigna, Kaiser, etc.) of their own choosing. People who are offered health insurance through their employer would in most cases continue to get that insurance. No proposal has government-employed doctors.

There are several "live" proposals right now. All of them would retain the current employer-based system of health insurance but would create a health insurance "exchange" for people who are not offered insurance through their employer or who currently purchase insurance in the individual market. People with very low incomes would have access to Medicaid and people with incomes between 150% of the federal poverty level up to 400% would be eligible for subsidies to help them purchase coverage. People would be required to buy health insurance and would be subject to a financial penalty if they did not buy it. Some proposals would include a public plan that would compete alongside private plans. In CBO estimates based on the actual legislative language, they have not concluded that the public plan would be the lowest cost plan, although they believe it would be lower than the average cost plan, just not the lowest. They don't believe it would become the dominant plan but believe it could get significant enrollment because it would be well-known. But people would have choices other than the public plan and some would be lower cost than the public plan.

I know the discussion is not that active over here at the moment. I just thought I'd throw that out and act like I was an expert for a moment.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by RedHeadGal

Re the socialism points, I will say I have an in at CBO in the health division, and every time this topic comes up I hear about how current proposals are not socialism. I hear it explained like this (this is not my interpretation, but that of my CBO source):

No serious congressional proposal envisions anything close to socialized medicine. The senate and house proposals are quite similar; they would give subsidies to people with low incomes to purchase PRIVATE coverage (such as Aetna, United Health Plan, Cigna, Kaiser, etc.) of their own choosing. People who are offered health insurance through their employer would in most cases continue to get that insurance. No proposal has government-employed doctors.

There are several "live" proposals right now. All of them would retain the current employer-based system of health insurance but would create a health insurance "exchange" for people who are not offered insurance through their employer or who currently purchase insurance in the individual market. People with very low incomes would have access to Medicaid and people with incomes between 150% of the federal poverty level up to 400% would be eligible for subsidies to help them purchase coverage. People would be required to buy health insurance and would be subject to a financial penalty if they did not buy it. Some proposals would include a public plan that would compete alongside private plans. In CBO estimates based on the actual legislative language, they have not concluded that the public plan would be the lowest cost plan, although they believe it would be lower than the average cost plan, just not the lowest. They don't believe it would become the dominant plan but believe it could get significant enrollment because it would be well-known. But people would have choices other than the public plan and some would be lower cost than the public plan.

I know the discussion is not that active over here at the moment. I just thought I'd throw that out and act like I was an expert for a moment.

or to distill what you said in one word: socialism.

[MikeWaters]

So doesn't Gates have to argue that the 911 caller was a racist, for his viewpoint to make any sense?

Gates has acted like an ass.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

or to distill what you said in one word: socialism.

Look, honestly, it isn't socialism, and I assume you are just trolling.

Let's accept first of all that we are discussing "socialism" within the context of a particular industry and not with respect to the entire US government (i.e., even if the US government were to control the means of production for all health care, it could be described as socialistic with respect to health care, but it wouldn't be a socialistic government in the aggregate, assuming it doesn't control all means of production in all industries, or even most industries).

With health care, people are confusing terms when they refer to "socialized medicine." Nobody is talking about or proposing socialized medicine. That is, in essence, what England has as its model. The doctors themselves are employed by the government. The Congress is not planning to adopt, nor will it adopt, that model. As a result, "socialized medicine" is a complete misnomer.

If the government were to adopt a single payor system (which many advocate, but which isn't even under consideration right now), it could be described as "socialized health insurance" because the government would be the only entity offering insurance. That won't be the case, and isn't being contemplated.

Instead, the Congress is proposing a system where private insurance remains (i.e., it isn't, by definition, socialism) and where the government also provides insurance as a competitor to the private insurance companies. In reality, if people would bother to think about it, we already have the government as a competitor in some limited areas of health care insurance, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and nobody would properly describe our current system as "socialism." And before you get ahead of yourselves in saying the proposed plan will inevitably lead to elimination of all private insurance companies and the establishment of a single payor system, well, the CBO disagrees with you (per its report issued yesterday)..