McConnell: I'll repeal Obamacare as majority leader

.

The GOP has done a shitty job of offering a clear alternative that covers most people.

Right now it's too easy for the Dems to say "they want you to be on your own."

The GOP had their chance, oh well.

.

I think putting everyone to work is the most logical of alternatives.

Yep. Jobs, jobs, jobs. But, the GOP represents the business class and both understand that high unemployment makes it much easier to cut wages and benefits. It's no surprise the GOP never solved the illegal immigration problem when they controlled the White House, The Congress and had five fairly certain votes on the Supreme Court - cheap labor benefits the few and not the many.

No question that the GOP wants jobs, jobs, jobs

But only low paying jobs that they can make the most profit off of
 
No one knows if the costs to provide actual medical care will go up or down. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Many serious medical conditions diagnosed early can be treated successfully and at less cost - both in terms of dollars spent and human misery.
So we'll test 100% (or close to it) of the people for serious medical conditions, to screen out the scant few percent who may have said nondescript maladies ?

Yeah...That'll save heaps of dough! :rolleyes:

images

It is a risk/rewards decision on prescreening

Many treatable illnesses can be detected through periodic blood/urine tests. Much better to detect colon cancer or breast cancer early through early screenings
 
I think putting everyone to work is the most logical of alternatives.

Yep. Jobs, jobs, jobs. But, the GOP represents the business class and both understand that high unemployment makes it much easier to cut wages and benefits. It's no surprise the GOP never solved the illegal immigration problem when they controlled the White House, The Congress and had five fairly certain votes on the Supreme Court - cheap labor benefits the few and not the many.

No question that the GOP wants jobs, jobs, jobs

But only low paying jobs that they can make the most profit off of

Well, how else are we gonna compete with China, Mexico, et. al. if we don't turn back the clock about 100 years?

We need to go back to company stores, dammit!
 
I think putting everyone to work is the most logical of alternatives.

Yep. Jobs, jobs, jobs. But, the GOP represents the business class and both understand that high unemployment makes it much easier to cut wages and benefits. It's no surprise the GOP never solved the illegal immigration problem when they controlled the White House, The Congress and had five fairly certain votes on the Supreme Court - cheap labor benefits the few and not the many.

No question that the GOP wants jobs, jobs, jobs

But only low paying jobs that they can make the most profit off of

Not to mention getting rid of the minimum wage so we all can work for $3 an hour. Go GOP! :eusa_hand:
 
well making alot of people homeless was a good start on their plan dont you think?
 
No one knows if the costs to provide actual medical care will go up or down. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Many serious medical conditions diagnosed early can be treated successfully and at less cost - both in terms of dollars spent and human misery.
So we'll test 100% (or close to it) of the people for serious medical conditions, to screen out the scant few percent who may have said nondescript maladies ?

Yeah...That'll save heaps of dough! :rolleyes:

images

As noted above, there is no cure for intellectual myopia.
 
Yep. Jobs, jobs, jobs. But, the GOP represents the business class and both understand that high unemployment makes it much easier to cut wages and benefits. It's no surprise the GOP never solved the illegal immigration problem when they controlled the White House, The Congress and had five fairly certain votes on the Supreme Court - cheap labor benefits the few and not the many.

No question that the GOP wants jobs, jobs, jobs

But only low paying jobs that they can make the most profit off of

Not to mention getting rid of the minimum wage so we all can work for $3 an hour. Go GOP! :eusa_hand:

$3 an hour wage, no insurance, no benefits, no job security

Just think......Conservatives could create a lot more jobs
Or....they could just pocket the extra cash
 
"By using a budget process called reconciliation, a theoretical Senate GOP majority could successfully vote to repeal the law with just 51 votes, rather than a filibuster-proof 60. Republicans need to pick up four seats to win control of the Senate, or three if Romney wins the White House."

McConnell: I'll repeal Obamacare as majority leader - POLITICO.com

and a Constitutional fight over it would ensue.

The right wing has misused Senate rules since they first regained control in the latter half of the 20th century. Many rules they abused, they got rid of when they took control in order to keep the minority from doing what they did.

Most GOP tactics reveal their projections of how they would act in any given situation.

The comity of the US Senate will once again be put to a test. Let us hope that McConnell does not do to the Senate what Gingrich and his gang of punks did to the House.
 
No question that the GOP wants jobs, jobs, jobs

But only low paying jobs that they can make the most profit off of

Not to mention getting rid of the minimum wage so we all can work for $3 an hour. Go GOP! :eusa_hand:

$3 an hour wage, no insurance, no benefits, no job security

Just think......Conservatives could create a lot more jobs
Or....they could just pocket the extra cash

The right could pattern the new American work environment after the Chinese model: everyone would live at the factory, sleep in dorms, and as noted ‘shop’ at the company store.

It would be a conservative Utopia come true.
 
Projecting again, Danny?

Why don't you tell us all how testing 100% of the population to screen out the few percent for life threatening maladies is in any way economically efficient?

C'mon....Dazzle us.

Saves lives

Doesn't mean much to the party of "let him die" but the rest of us think it is important
 
Projecting again, Danny?

Why don't you tell us all how testing 100% of the population to screen out the few percent for life threatening maladies is in any way economically efficient?

C'mon....Dazzle us.

Saves lives

Doesn't mean much to the party of "let him die" but the rest of us think it is important
"Saves lives" is not an economic argument, it's an appeal to emotion.

Try and concentrate.
 
Projecting again, Danny?

Why don't you tell us all how testing 100% of the population to screen out the few percent for life threatening maladies is in any way economically efficient?

C'mon....Dazzle us.

1. Prevention is cheaper than treatment.

2. Communicable disease can be diagnosed and treated before spreading to the general population.

3. Communicable disease can spread through an office or construction site rapidly and create costly delays.

4. Education can prevent unwanted/unplanned pregnancy and abortions.

5. Healthy habits can be reinforced when the harm done by tobacco, alcohol, illegal drugs can be quantified by medical examinations and or tests.

6. Emergency room costs will be reduced when regular medical appointments are available to the 30 million or so currently uninsured.

What is the cost-benefit? No one knows, but I'm fairly certain the libertarian way will result in a more Somalia type of society than a Canadian one.
 
Projecting again, Danny?

Why don't you tell us all how testing 100% of the population to screen out the few percent for life threatening maladies is in any way economically efficient?

C'mon....Dazzle us.

Saves lives

Doesn't mean much to the party of "let him die" but the rest of us think it is important
"Saves lives" is not an economic argument, it's an appeal to emotion.

Try and concentrate.

Who gives a shit Dude?

We choose to live in a society where people do not die at 54

Well, those of us who are not Libertarian do
 
Saves lives

Doesn't mean much to the party of "let him die" but the rest of us think it is important
"Saves lives" is not an economic argument, it's an appeal to emotion.

Try and concentrate.

Who gives a shit Dude?

We choose to live in a society where people do not die at 54

Well, those of us who are not Libertarian do
I didn't invoke an economic argument that's nothing but an easily debunked leftard yapping point, which doesn't make any sense to anyone with a critical thought in their head.

And we live in a society where the average life expectancy is well into the mid-to-upper '70s.

You really shouldn't be hitting the hard stuff so early in the day.
 
"Saves lives" is not an economic argument, it's an appeal to emotion.

Try and concentrate.

Who gives a shit Dude?

We choose to live in a society where people do not die at 54

Well, those of us who are not Libertarian do
I didn't invoke an economic argument that's nothing but an easily debunked leftard yapping point, which doesn't make any sense to anyone with a critical thought in their head.

And we live in a society where the average life expectancy is well into the mid-to-upper '70s.

You really shouldn't be hitting the hard stuff so early in the day.

Its your train of thought dude....the economic viability of preventive medicine

What was the Ron Paul response to a scenario where someone does not carry insurance? He had no issues when the audience shouted "Let him die"

Sad reality is that people who do not have insurance late in life die early......an accepted consequence by Libertarians
 

Forum List

Back
Top