Presidental Debate One

Eorzea Time
 
 
 
Language: JP EN FR DE
users online
Forum » Everything Else » Politics and Religion » Presidental Debate One
Presidental Debate One
First Page 2 3 ... 16 17 18 ... 23 24 25
 Asura.Squal
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 111
By Asura.Squal 2012-10-04 13:18:17
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bismarck.Bloodrose said: »
As for the healthcare issue under the constitution, is it not one of the greatest points that all American Citizens have the right to Life and Liberty?

If that's true, wouldn't privatizing healthcare negate both aspects by limiting one's right to essential life-saving healthcare?

Having Universal Access to healthcare should be everyone's liberty, not just to those that can afford it.

Yea, you're not misinterpreting that at all. They certainly meant by "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" that the government should take care of all health issues its citizens may encounter. That makes sense, being it was written during a time where a common cold could kill your *** and the life expectancy was about 35.

I bet by pursuit of happiness they meant we should all get $1,000,000 when we're born. Yea, having $1,000,000 should be everyone's liberty, not just to those that earn it.

Since when do liberals quote the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution anyways, thought you guys didn't believe in those?
 Cerberus.Pleebo
Offline
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
user: Pleebo
Posts: 9720
By Cerberus.Pleebo 2012-10-04 13:18:43
Link | Quote | Reply
 
It maintains a minimum level of coverage as insurance is an interstate commodity and allowing some states have lower insurance standards weakens the entire system overall.

And reproductive care IS basic care.
 Cerberus.Pleebo
Offline
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
user: Pleebo
Posts: 9720
By Cerberus.Pleebo 2012-10-04 13:20:38
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Squal said: »
Bismarck.Bloodrose said: »
As for the healthcare issue under the constitution, is it not one of the greatest points that all American Citizens have the right to Life and Liberty?

If that's true, wouldn't privatizing healthcare negate both aspects by limiting one's right to essential life-saving healthcare?

Having Universal Access to healthcare should be everyone's liberty, not just to those that can afford it.

Yea, you're not misinterpreting that at all. They certainly meant by "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" that the government should take care of all health issues its citizens may encounter. That makes sense, being it was written during a time where a common cold could kill your *** and the life expectancy was about 35.

I bet by pursuit of happiness they meant we should all get $1,000,000 when we're born. Yea, having $1,000,000 should be everyone's liberty, not just to those that earn it.

Since when do liberals quote the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution anyways, thought you guys didn't believe in those?
[+]
 Bahamut.Baconwrap
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 5381
By Bahamut.Baconwrap 2012-10-04 13:21:20
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
My state has laws preventing insurance carriers from rejecting you based on pre-existing conditions if you are simply switching providers due to a job change. Why do we need to have the feds do something that's clearly capable of occurring on a state level?

Except that the ACA doesn't provide for just basic inoculations and vaccines, it wants me to pay for plans that include abortive services and birth control and a whole ton of ***that goes far beyond what is required to prevent the basic spread of disease.

So one must to move to YOUR state in order to receive fair health-care coverage. That makes total sense.

Ok I never even mentioned vaccinations:

Quote:
E.g. I inoculate 10 people with a bacterial infection. I only treat one individual in that group of 10. Those 10 who are in contact, then reinfect the one that has been treated. Over the course of time, evolution intervenes, and you now have a drug resistant strain- in layman's terms your costing the guy who can pay for health coverage more money by not providing health coverage to the others
Inoculate, just so there is no confusion(is to introduce a microorganism into). This goes far beyond vaccinations/prevention, this goes into antivirals and antibiotics. Because of the way bacteria transfer information(Bacterial conjugation), and the way both bacteria and virus evolve, you are speeding up the rate at which pharm companies have to spit out newer drugs by not treating all patients in a population and costing everyone more money ultimately.

As far as "the pill" and abortion, didn't we run that topic into the ground in like 15 threads already?! "The pill" has medicinal purposes beyond simple contraception- so that argument doesn't stick in 2012. You need to read-into that "abortion surcharge" if you really think your by mandate have to pay for other peoples' abortions (Obamacare 'Abortion Surcharge': The Facts Behind The Rumor).
 Bismarck.Angeleus
Offline
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
user: Munky
Posts: 2614
By Bismarck.Angeleus 2012-10-04 13:23:52
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: »

Oh this made my evening!

LOL
 Sylph.Kandu
Offline
Server: Sylph
Game: FFXI
user: Kandu
Posts: 279
By Sylph.Kandu 2012-10-04 13:24:17
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Fenrir.Terminus said: »
But really, are you actually satisfied with the efficiency and quality of our government?

Satisfied, yes.
 Ragnarok.Nausi
Offline
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
user: Nausi
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2012-10-04 13:24:35
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
My state has laws preventing insurance carriers from rejecting you based on pre-existing conditions if you are simply switching providers due to a job change. Why do we need to have the feds do something that's clearly capable of occurring on a state level?

Except that the ACA doesn't provide for just basic inoculations and vaccines, it wants me to pay for plans that include abortive services and birth control and a whole ton of ***that goes far beyond what is required to prevent the basic spread of disease.

So one must to move to YOUR state in order to receive fair health-care coverage. That makes total sense.

Ok I never even mentioned vaccinations:

Quote:
E.g. I inoculate 10 people with a bacterial infection. I only treat one individual in that group of 10. Those 10 who are in contact, then reinfect the one that has been treated. Over the course of time, evolution intervenes, and you now have a drug resistant strain- in layman's terms your costing the guy who can pay for health coverage more money by not providing health coverage to the others
Inoculate, just so there is no confusion(is to introduce a microorganism into). This goes far beyond vaccinations/prevention, this goes into anti-virals and anti-biotics. Because of the way bacteria transfer information(Bacterial conjugation), and the way both bacteria and virus evolve, you are speeding up the rate at which pharm companies have to spit out newer drugs by not treating all patients in a population.

As far as "the pill" and abortion, didn't we run that topic into the ground in like 15 threads already?! The pill" has medicinal beyond simple contraception So that argument doesn't stick in 2012. You need to read-into that "abortion surcharge" if you really think your by mandate have to pay for other peoples' abortions (Obamacare 'Abortion Surcharge': The Facts Behind The Rumor).
No one does not need to move to my state in order to get that, but why do you need to make a 2400+ page legislative mess that rockets premiums up double digit percentages every year when you could just simply make those changes to your own state and leave the rest of us alone?

EDIT:

Don't you remember the whole "Bart Stupack" mess? There is no language in the legislation that prevents abortive services being covered in market plans, only an executive order which can be changed on a whim.
Offline
Posts: 1534
By ScaevolaBahamut 2012-10-04 13:28:02
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Fenrir.Terminus said: »
Sylph.Kandu said: »
Fenrir.Terminus said: »
Just about everything our government tries to do, it does poorly.
Subjective, at best.
Sure, I made that statement based on what I see, hear, read, and have experienced. And since I said that, it's obviously beyond my ability and attention span to list everything that the government does, and compare it to other countries, or to private equivalents - I could work on one thing for months and months and still not be able to "prove it." Also, other people surely have had different personal experiences as well as different standards when it comes to saying what a "good job" is. For example (made up,) I could say that 40% percent of the bridges in the country have not been maintained according to their maintenance schedules, and that 20% are structurally deficient. I might say that every bridge needs to be maintained properly, and that this is bad. Someone else might say that there's no problem until bridges actually start collapsing. I have no doubt that hardworking, responsible, honest people exist in our government. And I actually enjoy seeing and evaluating all kinds of things in order to expand my understanding of it. But so far, the "bad job" category is winning. If anyone has, for the most part, only experienced efficient and responsible government behavior, then congratulations to them. I would absolutely prefer that to be my experience as well. But really, are you actually satisfied with the efficiency and quality of our government?

Have you ever actually stopped to reflect on, for instance, how little personal knowledge you have of the harvesting, handling, and general overall safety of the food you eat?

And yet here you are, dodging botulism long enough to post silly things on the internet about how the feds can't do their job.
[+]
 Bahamut.Baconwrap
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 5381
By Bahamut.Baconwrap 2012-10-04 13:28:25
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
No one does not need to move to my state in order to get that, but why do you need to make a 2400+ page legislative mess that rockets premiums up double digit percentages every year when you could just simply make those changes to your own state and leave the rest of us alone?
Because concepts like fair-health care coverage should be universal and not left up to state legislatures.

I'm off to the gym on that note.
 Ragnarok.Nausi
Offline
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
user: Nausi
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2012-10-04 13:29:44
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
No one does not need to move to my state in order to get that, but why do you need to make a 2400+ page legislative mess that rockets premiums up double digit percentages every year when you could just simply make those changes to your own state and leave the rest of us alone?

Because concepts like fair-health care coverage should be universal and not left up to state legislatures.

Get a job and pay for your own like the vast majority of us, you are not entitled to the money from my wallet because you believe yourself to be more enlightened than the rest of us.
 Fairy.Ghaleon
Offline
Server: Fairy
Game: FFXI
user: MisterRyu
Posts: 2742
By Fairy.Ghaleon 2012-10-04 13:29:51
Link | Quote | Reply
 
just finished watching this (fell asleep to it last night lul)

I was actually suprised at how well Mittens kept himself during the debate, though the guy still makes zero sense when it comes to spending and the deficit.

he almost feels like the guy who is willing to say anything so he can win lol.
Offline
Posts: 1534
By ScaevolaBahamut 2012-10-04 13:33:31
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
No one does not need to move to my state in order to get that, but why do you need to make a 2400+ page legislative mess that rockets premiums up double digit percentages every year when you could just simply make those changes to your own state and leave the rest of us alone?
Because concepts like fair-health care coverage should be universal and not left up to state legislatures.
Get a job and pay for your own like the vast majority of us, you are not entitled to the money from my wallet because you believe yourself to be more enlightened than the rest of us.

but we already ARE paying for his health care

why are you against a cheaper and more efficient solution to the problem of the uninsured
 Bahamut.Baconwrap
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 5381
By Bahamut.Baconwrap 2012-10-04 13:33:50
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Get a job and pay for your own like the vast majority of us, you are not entitled to the money from my wallet because you believe yourself to be more enlightened than the rest of us.
I have a job thank you very much. And I do have health insurance right now. I also have a chronic condition that I developed while under the care of my current provider. So once I leave my employer I will be unable to get another health care provider without ACA.

You need to educate yourself on the concepts of altruism and epidemiology. Individualistic mentalities in healthcare are dangerous for an entire population.
 Shiva.Nikolce
Offline
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
user: Nikolce
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2012-10-04 13:37:34
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Fenrir.Terminus said: »
But really, are you actually satisfied with the efficiency and quality of our government?

It never got gridlocked enough for me...

A lot of people complain about obstructionism but I am all for it regardless of which party is blocking the road. Of course I am a cynical old fool that doesn't believe anyone can do anything right in the us when it comes to politics or foreign policy. Or money.

As an example... Have any of the usa progressive liberal redistribution of wealth people out there ever divided the total word wealth by the global population? It's 42 trillion divided by 7 billion and it comes out to $545 dollars a year if we could somehow magically do it without incurring any costs in the distribution process.

I understand redistribution of wealth SOUNDS good to you, take some money from wealthy people and give it to poor people, but it doesn't work that way. We can't just take it from the "1%" and give it to ourselves and call it a fair and equitable day.

YOU are the 1%, compared to the rest of the world. If you are reading this post you would be taking a very savage pay cut.

Keep in mind the average american spends $6,500 just on food
[+]
 Sylph.Kandu
Offline
Server: Sylph
Game: FFXI
user: Kandu
Posts: 279
By Sylph.Kandu 2012-10-04 13:39:30
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
You are not entitled to the money from my wallet because you believe yourself to be more enlightened than the rest of us.

Correct, but you must draw the distinction between money that is actually in your wallet from the taxes you pay. How you spend your money and how the government spends its money are going to differ.

The tax payer's sense of entitlement...
[+]
 Ragnarok.Nausi
Offline
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
user: Nausi
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2012-10-04 13:40:04
Link | Quote | Reply
 
ScaevolaBahamut said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
No one does not need to move to my state in order to get that, but why do you need to make a 2400+ page legislative mess that rockets premiums up double digit percentages every year when you could just simply make those changes to your own state and leave the rest of us alone?
Because concepts like fair-health care coverage should be universal and not left up to state legislatures.
Get a job and pay for your own like the vast majority of us, you are not entitled to the money from my wallet because you believe yourself to be more enlightened than the rest of us.

but we already ARE paying for his health care

why are you against a cheaper and more efficient solution to the problem of the uninsured

My premiums went up 20% LAST YEAR alone. The idea that the ACA is making everyone's healthcare cheaper is demonstrably false.
 Ragnarok.Nausi
Offline
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
user: Nausi
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2012-10-04 13:41:05
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Sylph.Kandu said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
You are not entitled to the money from my wallet because you believe yourself to be more enlightened than the rest of us.

Correct, but you must draw the distinction between money that is actually in your wallet from the taxes you pay. How you spend your money and how the government spends its money are going to differ.

The tax payer's sense of entitlement...

The government's money is MY money, if i did not make it, the government would not have it. It is 100% my business what is done with it.
 Sylph.Kandu
Offline
Server: Sylph
Game: FFXI
user: Kandu
Posts: 279
By Sylph.Kandu 2012-10-04 13:42:50
Link | Quote | Reply
 
If the government did not print it, you would not have it.
 Cerberus.Pleebo
Offline
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
user: Pleebo
Posts: 9720
By Cerberus.Pleebo 2012-10-04 13:44:28
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
ScaevolaBahamut said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
No one does not need to move to my state in order to get that, but why do you need to make a 2400+ page legislative mess that rockets premiums up double digit percentages every year when you could just simply make those changes to your own state and leave the rest of us alone?
Because concepts like fair-health care coverage should be universal and not left up to state legislatures.
Get a job and pay for your own like the vast majority of us, you are not entitled to the money from my wallet because you believe yourself to be more enlightened than the rest of us.

but we already ARE paying for his health care

why are you against a cheaper and more efficient solution to the problem of the uninsured

My premiums went up 20% LAST YEAR alone. The idea that the ACA is making everyone's healthcare cheaper is demonstrably false.
Please demonstrate that this rise in your premiums was due to the ACA.
Offline
Posts: 26
By daxxed 2012-10-04 13:44:36
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
No one does not need to move to my state in order to get that, but why do you need to make a 2400+ page legislative mess that rockets premiums up double digit percentages every year when you could just simply make those changes to your own state and leave the rest of us alone?
Because concepts like fair-health care coverage should be universal and not left up to state legislatures.

I'm off to the gym on that note.

and the truth finally comes out.. What's good for me is good for me.

even if its at the expense of everyone.. I think its pretty obvious no matter what happens pre existing conditions will disappear by either president. So we don't have to destroy america for you after all.
Offline
Posts: 32551
By Artemicion 2012-10-04 13:44:37
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
The government's money is MY money, if i did not make it, the government would not have it. It is 100% my business what is done with it.

Someone's watched those JG Wentworth commercials one too many times.
[+]
 Sylph.Tigerwoods
Offline
Server: Sylph
Game: FFXI
user: Vegetto
Posts: 15065
By Sylph.Tigerwoods 2012-10-04 13:45:25
Link | Quote | Reply
 
http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/contract/?contractId=743474
 Bahamut.Baconwrap
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 5381
By Bahamut.Baconwrap 2012-10-04 13:47:05
Link | Quote | Reply
 
daxxed said: »
and the truth finally comes out.. What's good for me is good for me.

even if its at the expense of everyone.. I think its pretty obvious no matter what happens pre existing conditions will disappear by either president. So we don't have to destroy america for you after all.
Why is that physicians and public health scientists arn't slamming ACA? Care to answer that one?

Seems like everyone who is slamming it has little or no background on how public health ACTUALLY functions, and circumvents basic concepts of epidemiology.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 1534
By ScaevolaBahamut 2012-10-04 13:48:26
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Quote:
My premiums went up 20% LAST YEAR alone. The idea that the ACA is making everyone's healthcare cheaper is demonstrably false.

That is a legitimate complaint about the ACA (I am willing, for the sake of argument, to concede that the ACA has not, as of yet, done much to reduce costs), but the primary cost control measure for self-insurers, the exchanges, are not mandated to go into effect until 2014, so you can't really expect people to eat crow over rising costs when the main statutory methods of controlling the totally predicted price spikes aren't even in play yet.
Offline
Posts: 32551
By Artemicion 2012-10-04 13:48:58
Link | Quote | Reply
 
There's shareholders and stocks based on a prediction?
And you are enabled to sell shares you don't actually have?
This planet scares me sometimes.
Offline
Posts: 26
By daxxed 2012-10-04 13:49:36
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: »
daxxed said: »
and the truth finally comes out.. What's good for me is good for me.

even if its at the expense of everyone.. I think its pretty obvious no matter what happens pre existing conditions will disappear by either president. So we don't have to destroy america for you after all.
Why is that physicians and public health scientists arn't slamming ACA? Care to answer that one?

Seems like everyone who is slamming it has little or no background on how public health ACTUALLY functions, and circumvents basic concepts of epidemiology.

I'm at a hospital everyday so go pound.
Offline
Posts: 32551
By Artemicion 2012-10-04 13:50:50
Link | Quote | Reply
 
daxxed said: »
I'm at a hospital everyday so go pound.

I play Call of Duty, so I have a pretty good grasp on foreign policy and the relative understanding of military budgets.

Your turn.
 Fenrir.Moldtech
Offline
Server: Fenrir
Game: FFXI
user: Moldtech
Posts: 574
By Fenrir.Moldtech 2012-10-04 13:51:34
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Sylph.Kandu said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
You are not entitled to the money from my wallet because you believe yourself to be more enlightened than the rest of us.

Correct, but you must draw the distinction between money that is actually in your wallet from the taxes you pay. How you spend your money and how the government spends its money are going to differ.

The tax payer's sense of entitlement...

The government's money is MY money, if i did not make it, the government would not have it. It is 100% my business what is done with it.

The problem there is that it's NOT just your money, it's everyone's money and everyone else has an equal say in how it's spent.
 Cerberus.Pleebo
Offline
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
user: Pleebo
Posts: 9720
By Cerberus.Pleebo 2012-10-04 13:51:34
Link | Quote | Reply
 
daxxed said: »
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: »
daxxed said: »
and the truth finally comes out.. What's good for me is good for me.

even if its at the expense of everyone.. I think its pretty obvious no matter what happens pre existing conditions will disappear by either president. So we don't have to destroy america for you after all.
Why is that physicians and public health scientists arn't slamming ACA? Care to answer that one?

Seems like everyone who is slamming it has little or no background on how public health ACTUALLY functions, and circumvents basic concepts of epidemiology.

I'm at a hospital everyday so go pound.
Emptying bed pans does not qualify you as a health professional.
[+]
 Bahamut.Baconwrap
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 5381
By Bahamut.Baconwrap 2012-10-04 13:52:57
Link | Quote | Reply
 
daxxed said: »
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: »
daxxed said: »
and the truth finally comes out.. What's good for me is good for me.

even if its at the expense of everyone.. I think its pretty obvious no matter what happens pre existing conditions will disappear by either president. So we don't have to destroy america for you after all.
Why is that physicians and public health scientists arn't slamming ACA? Care to answer that one?

Seems like everyone who is slamming it has little or no background on how public health ACTUALLY functions, and circumvents basic concepts of epidemiology.

I'm at a hospital everyday so go pound.

I hold a Masters of Public Health. I also work with anti-biotic resistant bacteria for my PhD program. So i have a pretty good grasp of how public health and epidemiology functions.

So please feel free to educate me how treating part of a population has no ramifications epidemiologically...
First Page 2 3 ... 16 17 18 ... 23 24 25