Presidental Debate One

Why is that physicians and public health scientists arn't slamming ACA? .

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.

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?

Emptying bed pans does not qualify you as a health professional.

Because their personal incomes haven't been negatively effected by it yet. On topic, the red tie isn't working for me.

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

I don't want to brag but my accreditation isn't in bed pans. That's for hippie trolls such as yourself.

Because their personal incomes haven't been negatively effected by it yet.

On topic, the red tie isn't working for me.

I don't want to brag but my accreditation isn't in bed pans. That's for hippie trolls such as yourself.

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.

You left out about 7 "uhhs" in that statement he made.

You left out about 7 "uhhs" in that statement he made.

That's not really what is meant by wealth redistribution. Wealth redistribution, in the non-politically loaded sense, occurs naturally in a capitalistic system. For example, workers are paid by capitalists to do labor, thus allowing wealth to redistribute from the upper bracket to a lower one. The problem we are facing today is that this movement of wealth has slowed or stagnated and wealth is now accumulating in the upper echelons while being removed from the lower.

When Obama or some other progressive-minded individual talks about wealth redistribution, they don't mean to forcibly take people's fortunes and rain it down on the general populace. They mean they want to stimulate that natural movement of wealth once again, thereby encouraging growth at all levels.

It's a common misconception that really bugs me.

How are they planning to do that exactly?

Tax and regulative incentive would be a start.

How is tax not forcibly taking?

Deces rhymes with feces, therefore your arguments are invalid.

(Hey, it makes as much sense as his posts.)

It was "life, liberty, and property" or at least it was until the libetards changed it.

So let me get this straight, a conservative says Fa-got (blocking one letter makes it ok, right?) and hes an insensitive, bigoted, homophobe, but a liberal does it and its ok, maybe even funny?

oic

we are just increasing their legal obligation, that does sound better than stealing...