Obamacare causes prices to skyrocket

[AntonToo]

The same safety net is available to anyone who qualifies, Bill Gates or not.

And can you reconcile your high flying ideology with earthy reality that all developed countries have safety net programs?

Clearly people disagree with you, quite universally too about responsibilties of government. Welcome to earth.

Who disagrees with him universally ?

We don't have single payer in this country....obviously people don't agree with you.

They can say it is a good idea, but there is no rush to elect people who will codify your dream.

Wtf? That's just uber-stupid.

Single payer is not a pre-requisite for safety net programs like ss, snap, Medicaid/care.

You think SS is universally loved ?

You think Medicaid is universally loved ?

Now that would be uber-stupid.

It is universally implemented in one form or another in all developed countries on planet earth. A first world country without safety nets does not exist. Developed civilization here has long REJECTED the argument that government should not be providing safetynets, so do you think at some point you rightwingers will come down to earth and talk about these matters in a way that doesn't make you sound like martians?

Which developed nations would that be ?

Umm all of them, dumbass. How many times do I have to repeat the same fucking thing?

 

[P@triot]

It is universally implemented in one form or another in all developed countries on planet earth. A first world country without safety nets does not exist. Developed civilization here has long REJECTED the argument that government should not be providing safetynets, so do you think at some point you rightwingers will come down to earth and talk about these matters in a way that doesn't make you sound like martians?

Yawn.....the same old tired Dumbocrat talking point of "hey....look how great that country over there is". And yet none of these Dumbocrats like Antontoo go live in those countries.

Here's the thing sparky....we don't care what other nations do. We have a law here in the United States that legally prevents the government from acting like a "safety net". It's called the U.S. Constitution. Now go home sparky and let the adults talk. Or better yet - go live in one of those other countries that you seem to love so much. But either way, you're clearly not even remotely qualified to be having this conversation.

 

[P@triot]

It is universally implemented in one form or another in all developed countries on planet earth. A first world country without safety nets does not exist. Developed civilization here has long REJECTED the argument that government should not be providing safetynets, so do you think at some point you rightwingers will come down to earth and talk about these matters in a way that doesn't make you sound like martians?

Venezuela has implemented every stupid thing you advocate for. How has that worked out for them? Well, they can't even keep the electricity running in that country. They are literally starving to death. Food is extremely scarce. And here is the most unbelievable of all - something as basic as toilet paper is now one of the highest commodities on the black market. That's what your kind of ignorant thinking produces sparky - famine, poverty, and misery.

The former U.S.S.R. implemented every stupid thing you advocate for. How did that work out for them? Well, in a nutshell, the nation collapsed and they had to turn to capitalism to survive. They couldn't even keep food on the shelves in stores. They would wait in line for more than 10 hours for a simple loaf of bread. That's what your kind of ignorant thinking produces sparky - famine, poverty, and misery.

Detroit was the ultimate liberal utopia. It was completely controlled by Dumbocrats for over 60 years. A dumbocrat mayor for over 60 straight years, a Dumbocrat controlled city council for over 60 straight years. And it had every libtards favorite thing - unions. Not just any unions either - the most powerful union on Earth. The UAW. How has that worked out for them? Well, libtard policy caused the city to file for bankruptcy. You get that sparky - an entire city had to file for bankruptcy. That is humiliating and a major indictment on your idiotic liberalism. The city is now literally a third-world shit-hole with dilapidated buildings everywhere, crime is rampant, drugs are everywhere, and - as is always the case - famine, poverty, and misery.

Do you see a pattern here sparky? You're an immature, idealistic, moron. You don't understand basic economics. Government does not exist to be a "safety net". That's not their role and it is something they cannot fulfill. The fact that you don't even know why we have a government is tragic (and a major indictment on public school education, which - like everything else - has been run into the ground by liberals). Now run along junior. Venezuela is waiting for you to come and enjoy all the wonders of your socialist utopia first-hand.

 

[P@triot]

Oh hey...what do you know! We're now up to 16 Obamacare Co-Ops that have collapsed. Just a few short weeks ago I posted the news that the 14th had collapsed and a few days after that, the 15th had collapsed.

You never notice that anything a liberal touches ultimately ends with the word collapsed. What an idiotic and failed ideology that these people cannot let go of. They are like those morons who still show up for KKK meetings and they are like 1 of 3 people in the room, and the other two is their spouse and child.

How the Rest of the Obamacare Co-Ops Are Faring

 

[AntonToo]

It is universally implemented in one form or another in all developed countries on planet earth. A first world country without safety nets does not exist. Developed civilization here has long REJECTED the argument that government should not be providing safetynets, so do you think at some point you rightwingers will come down to earth and talk about these matters in a way that doesn't make you sound like martians?

Venezuela has implemented every stupid thing you advocate for. How has that worked out for them? Well, they can't even keep the electricity running in that country. They are literally starving to death. Food is extremely scarce. And here is the most unbelievable of all - something as basic as toilet paper is now one of the highest commodities on the black market. That's what your kind of ignorant thinking produces sparky - famine, poverty, and misery.

The former U.S.S.R. implemented every stupid thing you advocate for. How did that work out for them? Well, in a nutshell, the nation collapsed and they had to turn to capitalism to survive. They couldn't even keep food on the shelves in stores. They would wait in line for more than 10 hours for a simple loaf of bread. That's what your kind of ignorant thinking produces sparky - famine, poverty, and misery.

Detroit was the ultimate liberal utopia. It was completely controlled by Dumbocrats for over 60 years. A dumbocrat mayor for over 60 straight years, a Dumbocrat controlled city council for over 60 straight years. And it had every libtards favorite thing - unions. Not just any unions either - the most powerful union on Earth. The UAW. How has that worked out for them? Well, libtard policy caused the city to file for bankruptcy. You get that sparky - an entire city had to file for bankruptcy. That is humiliating and a major indictment on your idiotic liberalism. The city is now literally a third-world shit-hole with dilapidated buildings everywhere, crime is rampant, drugs are everywhere, and - as is always the case - famine, poverty, and misery.

Do you see a pattern here sparky? You're an immature, idealistic, moron. You don't understand basic economics. Government does not exist to be a "safety net". That's not their role and it is something they cannot fulfill. The fact that you don't even know why we have a government is tragic (and a major indictment on public school education, which - like everything else - has been run into the ground by liberals). Now run along junior. Venezuela is waiting for you to come and enjoy all the wonders of your socialist utopia first-hand.

Seriously??? gross cherrypicking of under-developed countries is your best effort response?

You can't find anything in-between socialist economy and your imaginary safe-net-free utopia?

 

[P@triot]

It is universally implemented in one form or another in all developed countries on planet earth. A first world country without safety nets does not exist. Developed civilization here has long REJECTED the argument that government should not be providing safetynets, so do you think at some point you rightwingers will come down to earth and talk about these matters in a way that doesn't make you sound like martians?

Venezuela has implemented every stupid thing you advocate for. How has that worked out for them? Well, they can't even keep the electricity running in that country. They are literally starving to death. Food is extremely scarce. And here is the most unbelievable of all - something as basic as toilet paper is now one of the highest commodities on the black market. That's what your kind of ignorant thinking produces sparky - famine, poverty, and misery.

The former U.S.S.R. implemented every stupid thing you advocate for. How did that work out for them? Well, in a nutshell, the nation collapsed and they had to turn to capitalism to survive. They couldn't even keep food on the shelves in stores. They would wait in line for more than 10 hours for a simple loaf of bread. That's what your kind of ignorant thinking produces sparky - famine, poverty, and misery.

Detroit was the ultimate liberal utopia. It was completely controlled by Dumbocrats for over 60 years. A dumbocrat mayor for over 60 straight years, a Dumbocrat controlled city council for over 60 straight years. And it had every libtards favorite thing - unions. Not just any unions either - the most powerful union on Earth. The UAW. How has that worked out for them? Well, libtard policy caused the city to file for bankruptcy. You get that sparky - an entire city had to file for bankruptcy. That is humiliating and a major indictment on your idiotic liberalism. The city is now literally a third-world shit-hole with dilapidated buildings everywhere, crime is rampant, drugs are everywhere, and - as is always the case - famine, poverty, and misery.

Do you see a pattern here sparky? You're an immature, idealistic, moron. You don't understand basic economics. Government does not exist to be a "safety net". That's not their role and it is something they cannot fulfill. The fact that you don't even know why we have a government is tragic (and a major indictment on public school education, which - like everything else - has been run into the ground by liberals). Now run along junior. Venezuela is waiting for you to come and enjoy all the wonders of your socialist utopia first-hand.

Seriously??? gross cherrypicking of under-developed countries is your best effort response?

You can't find anything in-between socialist economy and your imaginary safe-net-free utopia?

So Detroit is in an "under-developed" country in your mind? Really?

So the former U.S.S.R. - at one time the world's elite super-power along side of the United States was an "under-developed" country in your mind? Really?

 

[P@triot]

Here are the "wonders" of government "safety nets"...

"I also learned how people gamed the welfare system. They’d buy two dozen packs of soda with food stamps and then sell them at a discount for cash. They’d ring up their orders separately, buying food with food stamps, and beer, wine, and cigarettes with cash. They’d regularly go through the checkout line speaking on their cell phones. I could never understand why our lives felt like a struggle while those living off of government largesse enjoyed trinkets that I only dreamed about.

Mamaw listened intently to my experiences at Dillman’s. We began to view much of our fellow working class with mistrust. Most of us were struggling to get by, but we made do, worked hard, and hoped for a better life. But a large minority was content to live off the dole."

Seeing Food Stamp Use Changed My Mind About Democrats

The indisputable reality is - if you incentivize people not to work - they won't. At that is why it ultimately leads to collapse as more and more people mooch off of society and less and less people are forced to carry the load (can you say "Atlas Shrugged"?). You want to get people out of poverty? Make them miserable in their poverty. Content people aren't motivated to do anything.

“I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.” - Benjamin Franklin

 

[AntonToo]

So Detroit is in an "under-developed" country in your mind? Really?
So the former U.S.S.R. - at one time the world's elite super-power along side of the United States was an "under-developed" country in your mind? Really?

dumbass, side discussions aside the glaring problem is your selection method. Your post is pure cherry-picked bullshit where you simply grab whatever economically challenged place comes to your mind and use them to prove the rule about all of the world that has safety-nets.

THEY DO NOT prove the rule. Your post is BS. Try arguing something non-stupid.

 

[P@triot]

So Detroit is in an "under-developed" country in your mind? Really?
So the former U.S.S.R. - at one time the world's elite super-power along side of the United States was an "under-developed" country in your mind? Really?

dumbass, side discussions aside the glaring problem is your selection method. Your post is pure cherry-picked bullshit where you simply grab whatever economically challenged place comes to your mind and use them to prove the rule about all of the world that has safety-nets.

THEY DO NOT prove the rule. Your post is BS. Try arguing something non-stupid.

Wow....you just keep moving the goalposts every time the facts show that you're an idiot. First you claimed that I pointed out only "under-developed" countries. When I showed you that I mentioned Detroit and the former U.S.S.R. (which was the #2 super-power in the world) you then moved the goal-posts yet again.

Government does not exist to serve as a "safety-net". I'm sorry you don't like it. Venezuela is waiting for you sparky.

 

[AntonToo]

So Detroit is in an "under-developed" country in your mind? Really?
So the former U.S.S.R. - at one time the world's elite super-power along side of the United States was an "under-developed" country in your mind? Really?

dumbass, side discussions aside the glaring problem is your selection method. Your post is pure cherry-picked bullshit where you simply grab whatever economically challenged place comes to your mind and use them to prove the rule about all of the world that has safety-nets.

THEY DO NOT prove the rule. Your post is BS. Try arguing something non-stupid.

Wow....you just keep moving the goalposts every time the facts show that you're an idiot. First you claimed that I pointed out only "under-developed" countries. When I showed you that I mentioned Detroit and the former U.S.S.R. (which was the #2 super-power in the world) you then moved the goal-posts yet again.

Government does not exist to serve as a "safety-net". I'm sorry you don't like it. Venezuela is waiting for you sparky.

Not to be too repetitive but why respond with something new when my previous post perfectly addressed your new one?

dumbass, side discussions aside the glaring problem is your selection method. Your post is pure cherry-picked bullshit where you simply grab whatever economically challenged place comes to your mind and use them to prove the rule about all of the world that has safety-nets.

You selection method is still BS, your post is still BS and you are still too fucking dumb to even understand the problem let alone improve your argument.

 

[P@triot]

So Detroit is in an "under-developed" country in your mind? Really?
So the former U.S.S.R. - at one time the world's elite super-power along side of the United States was an "under-developed" country in your mind? Really?

dumbass, side discussions aside the glaring problem is your selection method. Your post is pure cherry-picked bullshit where you simply grab whatever economically challenged place comes to your mind and use them to prove the rule about all of the world that has safety-nets.

THEY DO NOT prove the rule. Your post is BS. Try arguing something non-stupid.

Wow....you just keep moving the goalposts every time the facts show that you're an idiot. First you claimed that I pointed out only "under-developed" countries. When I showed you that I mentioned Detroit and the former U.S.S.R. (which was the #2 super-power in the world) you then moved the goal-posts yet again.

Government does not exist to serve as a "safety-net". I'm sorry you don't like it. Venezuela is waiting for you sparky.

Not to be too repetitive but why respond with something new when my previous post perfectly addressed your new one?

dumbass, side discussions aside the glaring problem is your selection method. Your post is pure cherry-picked bullshit where you simply grab whatever economically challenged place comes to your mind and use them to prove the rule about all of the world that has safety-nets.

You selection method is still BS, your post is still BS and you are still too fucking dumb to even understand the problem let alone improve your argument.

You haven't "addressed" anything. All you've done is move the goalposts because you can't "address" anything. You're wrong and that's all there is to it.

What's funny is that it doesn't even matter if your idiotic, economy collapsing ideology was right. The U.S. Constitution is the law and it dictates that what you desire cannot be done. It is illegal. Now run along stupid. You just got embarrassed. Go hide in Venezuela where they need the fucking black market just to get their hands on toilet paper because they implemented idiotic failed liberalism.

 

[P@triot]

Yes, people actually go through real hardships and your little right-winger comic-book characterizations are ridiculous and frankly offensive in the way they minimize the very real suffering people go through.

If people go through "real hardships" then why don't you help them, you greedy little prick? Why do you stand on the sidelines crying like a little bitch, demanding that we break the law simply because you're too selfish and too greedy to get in the game and make a difference?

 

[P@triot]

The same safety net is available to anyone who qualifies, Bill Gates or not. And can you reconcile your high flying ideology with earthy reality that all developed countries have safety net programs? Clearly people disagree with you, quite universally too about responsibilties of government. Welcome to earth.

The question is - why are you too selfish, greedy, and lazy to be the "safety net"? Where do you get off standing on the sidelines that demanding that government place a gun to the head of other people and force them to be the "safety net"?

You want to know how one knows for certain that something is wrong? When it has to be done by force. Everything Saddam Hussein did had to be done by force. Everything Benito Musollini did had to be done by force. And everything the modern-day idiot liberal wants done has to be done by force.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Who disagrees with him universally ?

We don't have single payer in this country....obviously people don't agree with you.

They can say it is a good idea, but there is no rush to elect people who will codify your dream.

Wtf? That's just uber-stupid.

Single payer is not a pre-requisite for safety net programs like ss, snap, Medicaid/care.

You think SS is universally loved ?

You think Medicaid is universally loved ?

Now that would be uber-stupid.

It is universally implemented in one form or another in all developed countries on planet earth. A first world country without safety nets does not exist. Developed civilization here has long REJECTED the argument that government should not be providing safetynets, so do you think at some point you rightwingers will come down to earth and talk about these matters in a way that doesn't make you sound like martians?

Which developed nations would that be ?

Umm all of them, dumbass. How many times do I have to repeat the same fucking thing?

You keep mumbling because you have your head up your ass.

So, that includes Greece.

Why don't you move there and make American smarter ?

Greek crisis: How did it get this bad?

It already had huge debts because successive governments spent way more than they collected in taxes. The scale of tax evasion was staggering - with tens of billions not being paid. Corruption and political favours were commonplace. While the Greek government's accounts were as good as fakes. Balance sheets submitted to its European partners often left out big spending projects.

 

[AntonToo]

The question is - why are you too selfish, greedy, and lazy to be the "safety net"? Where do you get off standing on the sidelines that demanding that government place a gun to the head of other people and force them to be the "safety net"?

You want to know how one knows for certain that something is wrong? When it has to be done by force. Everything Saddam Hussein did had to be done by force. Everything Benito Musollini did had to be done by force. And everything the modern-day idiot liberal wants done has to be done by force.

You are actually comparing taxing and spending in a first world representative democracy to totalitarian state. It isn't and saying it is just makes you look dumb (though we already know it's not just a look)

Beyond that, your proposition that safety nets become ELECTIVELY funded is also detached from reality. The programs will be completely dysfunctional and even more so in hard economic times when they are needed most.

But even feasibility aside,on the fairness angle - why would it be a good idea to let selfish assholes enjoy the benefits of functional society paid for by the kindness of suckers who will carry this burden?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The question is - why are you too selfish, greedy, and lazy to be the "safety net"? Where do you get off standing on the sidelines that demanding that government place a gun to the head of other people and force them to be the "safety net"?

You want to know how one knows for certain that something is wrong? When it has to be done by force. Everything Saddam Hussein did had to be done by force. Everything Benito Musollini did had to be done by force. And everything the modern-day idiot liberal wants done has to be done by force.

More fn stupid.

You are actually comparing taxing and spending in a first world representative democracy to totalitarian state. It isn't and saying it is just makes you look dumb (though we already know it's not just a look)

Beyond that, your proposition that safety nets become ELECTIVELY funded is also detached from reality. The programs will be completely dysfunctional and even more so in hard economic times when they are needed most.

But even feasibility aside,on the fairness angle - why would it be a good idea to let selfish assholes enjoy the benefits of functional society paid for by the kindness of suckers who will carry this burden?

I think that is what conservatives keep asking.

You have an incredibly selfish class of people who demand they be provided for....

Being funded by the suckers who work.

 

[AntonToo]

So, that includes Greece.

It also includes all the "good" countries..ta-da, dead end for your stupid argument reached.

 

[AntonToo]

I think that is what conservatives keep asking.

You have an incredibly selfish class of people who demand they be provided for....

Being funded by the suckers who work.

Bullshit. "Provided for class" is small minority and not nearly big enough to pass any coherent agenda ...especially considering that they barely even vote or have any social leverage through affluence.

That "class" cannot pass anything "provider class" populace does not consent to.

 

[P@triot]

But even feasibility aside,on the fairness angle - why would it be a good idea to let selfish assholes enjoy the benefits of functional society paid for by the kindness of suckers who will carry this burden?

Oh...you mean the exact society that liberals have built in America now.

(Psst.....stupid....48% of America pays no federal taxes at all. In other words, 48% of selfish assholes enjoy the "benefits" of "functional society" paid for by "the rest of us suckers who carry this burden").

Let a libtard talk long enough and they will defeat their own position with their own stupidity! Game over junior - you literally just defeated yourself.

 

[P@triot]

You are actually comparing taxing and spending

Being that you are a Dumbocrat, I would expect you to have read the U.S. Constitution to actually understand what you're talking about. So I'll fill you in here - taxing is not for redistributing wealth or acting like a "safety net". The purpose of taxing is to run the government. And the government (federal) is only responsible for 18 enumerated items (stuff like defense, protection of IP, post office, etc.).

The federal government is not empowered to simply decide they can "tax" whenever they want to do something. It doesn't work that way sparky.