Republican: "Thank God For Obamacare!"

[Zoom-boing]

No, I am not on drugs but anyone who hallucinates about “owning their tax dollars” could be. Obviously, you think only “conservatives” pay taxes. Reading your posts, you are obsessed with a distorted belief that government subsidies spent on programs are (your) tax dollars being given to support various government programs you don’t agree with! Most of the workers and white collar types pay taxes, including so-called liberals, progressives and others including so-called conservatives.. How do you even form your mouth to say “your” tax dollars are being spent on this or that/ It is impossible to differentiate between liberal tax monies or conservative tax monies.

Funny, I never said any of the above bolded. That's just typical leftist projection on your part. Feel free to go get links from me supporting your bullshit.

Here are the exact words you said:

I think I read you right! You still think taxpayers and the government are two different things whether you actually say so or not. Your entire premise reeks of the piteous belief. When I clarified it, you panicked and overlooked words like “obviously” in the emboldened text... words which should have precluded your knee jerk reaction. You do know that when I used the adverb “ obviously” to describe a behavior or intent on your part it is not referring to an actual quote, don’t you? The other emboldened text was formed as a question extrapolated from your over concern about taxpayer’s money. You never even considered that the majority of voters who put Obama in office twice pay taxes too and that its THEIR tax dollars that foot the bill for progressive causes. Just think of it this way...your “conservative” tax dollars are being spent on DEFENSE or on all the bases we have around the world!

No you dont'. ^ More projection on your part, disguised as you 'thinking' you're being clever.

When the tax payer mails the check which he has made payable to the IRS, any proprietary interest in the exchange is lost unless he overpays and a refund is due. Your likes or dislikes, indeed, have no bearing on how the government distributes monies from the check you wrote!

You just reiterated what I said. Derrrr. You continue to dodge my last sentence.

That “someone else” is usually a body of individuals called American citizens. Their role in self governance is spelled out quite clearly in the Preamble to the United States Constitution:





And you lack of knowledge of the US Constitution tells me all I want to know about you!

Rambles on yet still doesn't mention that big old piece of pie.

Public schools? Is that why you think you are so obtuse? I guess picking up a dictionary is considered a weakness in your neighborhood. Here you go chap... I’ll be brave, charitable and do it for you!

Point went over your head. Naturally.

No, it didn’t go over my head, I just threw it back in your face!

Nah, you fumbled and are trying to recover. Fail!

 

[Zoom-boing]

Oh ! There you are!

What was that average maintenance cost per unit again?

Here let me give you my accountant's phone number right after you sign a confidentiality agreement.

You ought to stop now. You are going to wear out that shovel.

Nice playing with you, chief.

Ah ha ha! Typical LL m.o. Go on, run away.

You demanded his info, he provided it, you then still say he's a liar and change the subject to "you make all that $ you have nothing to complain about spending 2% on health insurance". You can't even remotely address his point, can you? Loser.

You are SO FULL OF SHIT. What part of his premium/deductible has risen substantially because he is BEING FORCED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO BUY SOMETHING HE DOES NOT NEED, DOES NOT WANT, WILL NEVER USE do you not get? Just because he has the money you think it's fine for him to be forced to spend it on shit he won't ever use? Who the fuck put YOU in charge of what someone else should spend THEIR money on?? What a fucking moronic idiot you are.

 

[Synthaholic]

When did right wing nuts turn against America?

Whenever there's a Democrat in the Oval Office.

 

[JQPublic1]

I subcontract out any maintenance work I don't do myself. I'm a contractor and can do any repairs that come along I give a couple guys a break on rent to mow lawns and plow. I own one car (a 10 year old Ford F350 that I paid cash for 6 years ago) My insurance for that vehicle is less than 200 a month.

The emboldened text certainly makes you sound like a fool! Anyone paying $200 per month for insurance on a 10 year old vehicle is either lying or a fool. A wise man would just pay liability and cut his insurance costs dramatically. After all, your insurance company is not going to give you more than a couple of hundred dollars if you total it!

You damage your wisdom and credibility further with references to your frugality and self aggrandizements :

]I'm sorry if I think paying for shit I don't need or want is not a good thing.

I suppose just because I can afford something I should buy it and pay more than I have to even if I don't need it.

I'm extremely frugal always have been and it's a habit I'm in no hurry to break

Poor lad. Like most pseudo-conservatives you don't even know who you are. Neither can you cope efficiently with even the most rudimentary challenges in life. You are simply projecting what you want to be, not what you are!

 

[JQPublic1]

When did right wing nuts turn against America?

Whenever there's a Democrat in the Oval Office.

Another sunshine patriot is revealed! Democrats, OTOH love their country no matter which party holds the reins.

 

[JQPublic1]

Now you have lowered the bar. Losers. like you, run out of arguments rather quickly. That being done, you abandon ethics and honor by revising or omitting elements of your opponent’s quotes. I have no need or desire to converse with such a cretin as you have turned out to be!

For those who study the insane, compare Zoom-Boing’s chopped up version of my quote to the original and make your diagnosis known to all! The man is psychotic!



Here are the exact words you said:

"government funds" wtf, are you on drugs? The government doesn't have any "funds", it is taxpayer money that is footing the bill. Anyone getting anything subsidized means someone else is paying for it; anyone who is paying more is paying for it. Period. It's only going to get worse. There is no "probably" about any of that.”

I think I read you right! You still think taxpayers and the government are two different things whether you actually say so or not. Your entire premise reeks of the piteous belief. When I clarified it, you panicked and overlooked words like “obviously” in the emboldened text... words which should have precluded your knee jerk reaction. You do know that when I used the adverb “ obviously” to describe a behavior or intent on your part it is not referring to an actual quote, don’t you? The other emboldened text was formed as a question extrapolated from your over concern about taxpayer’s money. You never even considered that the majority of voters who put Obama in office twice pay taxes too and that its THEIR tax dollars that foot the bill for progressive causes. Just think of it this way...your “conservative” tax dollars are being spent on DEFENSE or on all the bases we have around the world!

 

[Zoom-boing]

Now you have lowered the bar. Losers. like you, run out of arguments rather quickly. That being done, you abandon ethics and honor by revising or omitting elements of your opponent’s quotes. I have no need or desire to converse with such a cretin as you have turned out to be!

For those who study the insane, compare Zoom-Boing’s chopped up version of my quote to the original and make your diagnosis known to all! The man is psychotic!



Here are the exact words you said:

"government funds" wtf, are you on drugs? The government doesn't have any "funds", it is taxpayer money that is footing the bill. Anyone getting anything subsidized means someone else is paying for it; anyone who is paying more is paying for it. Period. It's only going to get worse. There is no "probably" about any of that.”

I think I read you right! You still think taxpayers and the government are two different things whether you actually say so or not. Your entire premise reeks of the piteous belief. When I clarified it, you panicked and overlooked words like “obviously” in the emboldened text... words which should have precluded your knee jerk reaction. You do know that when I used the adverb “ obviously” to describe a behavior or intent on your part it is not referring to an actual quote, don’t you? The other emboldened text was formed as a question extrapolated from your over concern about taxpayer’s money. You never even considered that the majority of voters who put Obama in office twice pay taxes too and that its THEIR tax dollars that foot the bill for progressive causes. Just think of it this way...your “conservative” tax dollars are being spent on DEFENSE or on all the bases we have around the world!

I didn't chop up your post that's how it copied when I quoted it. It drops quotes as you go along. Sorry you weren't aware of this. You want to go fix it be my guest. I already did that in my previous post, wasn't going to do it again. I notice you failed to get any posts of mine that say what you've projected onto me. Fail.

What part of this is false: "The government doesn't have any "funds", it is taxpayer money that is footing the bill. Anyone getting anything subsidized means someone else is paying for it." *note, by 'government' I am referring to the DC crowd.

Three times you failed to address key points, as I noted in previous posts.

I'm done here.

 

[Spoonman]

Nice. Good for them.

OBAMACARE

5,000,000 - Lost their coverage

1 - successful client served.


Hey, they're on a roll




Let me ask you this. WTF happened to the 40,000,000 uninsured who were clamorning for healthcare we had to pass this mess for? Do they all of a sudden not need insurance? or those just more bullshit democratic numbers?

Less than 6 million that have paid and a mandate forcing 300+ million people to buy overpriced insurance is a win for the liberals

an even bigger win for the insurance companies, who this bill was really written for anyway

 

[JQPublic1]

I didn't chop up your post that's how it copied when I quoted it. It drops quotes as you go along. Sorry you weren't aware of this. You want to go fix it be my guest. I already did that in my previous post, wasn't going to do it again.

Funny, I never had that problem or has anyone else that I know of. I am not saying it isn't possible, but when dealing with "conservatives" one has to be on guard for treachery and tricks! Still, the content of your character is called into question when you reveal that you would allow a post to misrepresent a fellow debater due to a glitch. You are still responsible for that post and should be held accountable for it

I notice you failed to get any posts of mine that say what you've projected onto me. Fail.

Aww, fellow, you whine too much. You just did not like the response given.

What part of this is false: "The government doesn't have any "funds", it is taxpayer money that is footing the bill.

All of it is false! The government does have funds. And since you apparently did not read my post explaining that premise, I will post it again: When you put your tax payment in the mail, it is payable to the IRS and that money no longer belongs to you. Now, if you really want to be technical about it, even as you generate your income, part of the money from that labor already belongs to the government

Anyone getting anything subsidized means someone else is paying for it." *note, by 'government' I am referring to the DC crowd.

I suppose one could look at it like that! Another viewpoint is that taxpayer funds are just one source of government income. With some government funds being generated by land leasing, interest on loans and fines, or other myriad sources, your premise is not entirely true. Yours is a specious belief that rests entirely on nebulous assumptions. My point is that you cannot differentiate between taxpayer funds or funds generated by interest on outstanding loans. That renders your premise as little more than speculation at best!

Three times you failed to address key points, as I noted in previous posts.

What key points? All I have seen from you is an obsessive push to revise the definition of "subsidize."

I'm done here.

You were done long before now.

 

[Zoom-boing]

I didn't chop up your post that's how it copied when I quoted it. It drops quotes as you go along. Sorry you weren't aware of this. You want to go fix it be my guest. I already did that in my previous post, wasn't going to do it again.

Funny, I never had that problem or has anyone else that I know of. I am not saying it isn't possible, but when dealing with "conservatives" one has to be on guard for treachery and tricks! Still, the content of your character is called into question when you reveal that you would allow a post to misrepresent a fellow debater due to a glitch. You are still responsible for that post and should be held accountable for it

You're quite the odd one.

I notice you failed to get any posts of mine that say what you've projected onto me.

Fail.Aww, fellow, you whine too much. You just did not like the response given.

No, you projected, can't find anything that I posted that supports your projection, and now resort to 'you're whining!'. You fail.

All of it is false! The government does have funds. And since you apparently did not read my post explaining that premise, I will post it again: When you put your tax payment in the mail, it is payable to the IRS and that money no longer belongs to you. Now, if you really want to be technical about it, even as you generate your income, part of the money from that labor already belongs to the government.

So once again class. Where does the government get its money from?

Thank you for proving my point.

I suppose one could look at it like that! Another viewpoint is that taxpayer funds are just one source of government income. With some government funds being generated by land leasing, interest on loans and fines, or other myriad sources, your premise is not entirely true. Yours is a specious belief that rests entirely on nebulous assumptions. My point is that you cannot differentiate between taxpayer funds or funds generated by interest on outstanding loans. That renders your premise as little more than speculation at best!

There is no "suppose" about it. The government does not produce anything, can't purchase anything without getting its 'funds' (revenue) from someone else. That would be joe taxpayer. Here, this will help you understand. United States Government Revenue History - Charts

Three times you failed to address key points, as I noted in previous posts.

What key points? All I have seen from you is an obsessive push to revise the definition of "subsidize."

Dodge ball again. Heads up!

I'm done here.

You were done long before now.

Oh look, you think you're being cute. Awww.

Now, go quote this post and see how it drops quotes.

 

[Meister]

I didn't chop up your post that's how it copied when I quoted it. It drops quotes as you go along. Sorry you weren't aware of this. You want to go fix it be my guest. I already did that in my previous post, wasn't going to do it again.

Funny, I never had that problem or has anyone else that I know of. I am not saying it isn't possible, but when dealing with "conservatives" one has to be on guard for treachery and tricks! Still, the content of your character is called into question when you reveal that you would allow a post to misrepresent a fellow debater due to a glitch. You are still responsible for that post and should be held accountable for it

I notice you failed to get any posts of mine that say what you've projected onto me. Fail.

Aww, fellow, you whine too much. You just did not like the response given.


All of it is false! The government does have funds. And since you apparently did not read my post explaining that premise, I will post it again: When you put your tax payment in the mail, it is payable to the IRS and that money no longer belongs to you. Now, if you really want to be technical about it, even as you generate your income, part of the money from that labor already belongs to the government



I suppose one could look at it like that! Another viewpoint is that taxpayer funds are just one source of government income. With some government funds being generated by land leasing, interest on loans and fines, or other myriad sources, your premise is not entirely true. Yours is a specious belief that rests entirely on nebulous assumptions. My point is that you cannot differentiate between taxpayer funds or funds generated by interest on outstanding loans. That renders your premise as little more than speculation at best!

Three times you failed to address key points, as I noted in previous posts.

What key points? All I have seen from you is an obsessive push to revise the definition of "subsidize."

I'm done here.

You were done long before now.

oh brother

 

[Zoom-boing]

I didn't chop up your post that's how it copied when I quoted it. It drops quotes as you go along. Sorry you weren't aware of this. You want to go fix it be my guest. I already did that in my previous post, wasn't going to do it again.

Funny, I never had that problem or has anyone else that I know of. I am not saying it isn't possible, but when dealing with "conservatives" one has to be on guard for treachery and tricks! Still, the content of your character is called into question when you reveal that you would allow a post to misrepresent a fellow debater due to a glitch. You are still responsible for that post and should be held accountable for it

Aww, fellow, you whine too much. You just did not like the response given.


All of it is false! The government does have funds. And since you apparently did not read my post explaining that premise, I will post it again: When you put your tax payment in the mail, it is payable to the IRS and that money no longer belongs to you. Now, if you really want to be technical about it, even as you generate your income, part of the money from that labor already belongs to the government



I suppose one could look at it like that! Another viewpoint is that taxpayer funds are just one source of government income. With some government funds being generated by land leasing, interest on loans and fines, or other myriad sources, your premise is not entirely true. Yours is a specious belief that rests entirely on nebulous assumptions. My point is that you cannot differentiate between taxpayer funds or funds generated by interest on outstanding loans. That renders your premise as little more than speculation at best!



What key points? All I have seen from you is an obsessive push to revise the definition of "subsidize."

I'm done here.

You were done long before now.

oh brother

He's tedious, isn't he?

*Note the dropped quotes.

 

[Meister]

Funny, I never had that problem or has anyone else that I know of. I am not saying it isn't possible, but when dealing with "conservatives" one has to be on guard for treachery and tricks! Still, the content of your character is called into question when you reveal that you would allow a post to misrepresent a fellow debater due to a glitch. You are still responsible for that post and should be held accountable for it

Aww, fellow, you whine too much. You just did not like the response given.


All of it is false! The government does have funds. And since you apparently did not read my post explaining that premise, I will post it again: When you put your tax payment in the mail, it is payable to the IRS and that money no longer belongs to you. Now, if you really want to be technical about it, even as you generate your income, part of the money from that labor already belongs to the government



I suppose one could look at it like that! Another viewpoint is that taxpayer funds are just one source of government income. With some government funds being generated by land leasing, interest on loans and fines, or other myriad sources, your premise is not entirely true. Yours is a specious belief that rests entirely on nebulous assumptions. My point is that you cannot differentiate between taxpayer funds or funds generated by interest on outstanding loans. That renders your premise as little more than speculation at best!



What key points? All I have seen from you is an obsessive push to revise the definition of "subsidize."
You were done long before now.

oh brother

He's tedious, isn't he?

*Note the dropped quotes.

He just likes to insult the intelligence of the conservatives.....trying to baffle them with bullshit.

 

[rdean]

The fact that you are in denial does not negate the fact that my insurance premium rose because I am being forced to pay for shit I neither need nor want.

Awwww. Look at you with all your facts!

What was the name of your old plan again? And the new one? Also....how old are you, where do you live and who is on the policy? Finally, what is your AGI!

I told you I tossed my old policy when it got cancelled I do not remember the name of the policy because like most people I tossed it in a drawer and put the card in my wallet and forgot about it. I now have a bronze level plan through Aetna

414 a month with a 6300 deductible. 246 more a month than I was paying for my old catastrophic care insurance

I am the only one on the policy as I am single and have no kids but somehow my policy has to cover maternity care and dental and optical for children under 12 not to mention mental health drug and alcohol counseling that I will never use.

My Agi last year was 283,659. I know that because I just got my taxes back.

So I'm sitting here Googling "aetna insurance for 168 a month single person" from 2000 to 2008 and what I found were numbers closer to this:

MONTHLY RATES START AT: $714 single / $1,808 family

and what you get is this:

When using your own doctors, you have
$5000/$15,000 deductible
60% coverage up to $10,000, 100% thereafter
Hospitalization
Mental Health – 20 visits
Chiropractic
When using AETNA doctors, you have
$25/$40 Office copay
Preventative Care
Hospitalization - $500 deductible
Mental Health – $40 copay/ 20 visits per year
Chiropractic
Plan includes a $20 generic/$30 brand/$50 drug card w/$200 deductible

------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps you should review that old insurance plan and see what the "fine print" actually says? Or maybe you could scan it an post it through one of those sites that lets you post pictures anonymously. You could ink out names and locations.

 

[Rozman]

All I know is before ObamaCare I went to the doctors office 4 times a year...
BP tested,blood taken,EKG performed and twice a year the ECHO/Sonar thing where they listen to blood flow.

Cost $80 to me....

Now I have a $6,000.00 deductible.

Office vist alone is now $250.00
Forget about the tests on top of that.
A few grand maybe...

I cancelled a scheduled appointment that I had for this month and told them why.
They said they understood....

Thanks Obama...

 

[Zoom-boing]

Awwww. Look at you with all your facts!

What was the name of your old plan again? And the new one? Also....how old are you, where do you live and who is on the policy? Finally, what is your AGI!

I told you I tossed my old policy when it got cancelled I do not remember the name of the policy because like most people I tossed it in a drawer and put the card in my wallet and forgot about it. I now have a bronze level plan through Aetna

414 a month with a 6300 deductible. 246 more a month than I was paying for my old catastrophic care insurance

I am the only one on the policy as I am single and have no kids but somehow my policy has to cover maternity care and dental and optical for children under 12 not to mention mental health drug and alcohol counseling that I will never use.

My Agi last year was 283,659. I know that because I just got my taxes back.

So I'm sitting here Googling "aetna insurance for 168 a month single person" from 2000 to 2008 and what I found were numbers closer to this:

MONTHLY RATES START AT: $714 single / $1,808 family

and what you get is this:

When using your own doctors, you have
$5000/$15,000 deductible
60% coverage up to $10,000, 100% thereafter
Hospitalization
Mental Health – 20 visits
Chiropractic
When using AETNA doctors, you have
$25/$40 Office copay
Preventative Care
Hospitalization - $500 deductible
Mental Health – $40 copay/ 20 visits per year
Chiropractic
Plan includes a $20 generic/$30 brand/$50 drug card w/$200 deductible

------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps you should review that old insurance plan and see what the "fine print" actually says? Or maybe you could scan it an post it through one of those sites that lets you post pictures anonymously. You could ink out names and locations.

Link?

 

[rdean]

All I know is before ObamaCare I went to the doctors office 4 times a year...
BP tested,blood taken,EKG performed and twice a year the ECHO/Sonar thing where they listen to blood flow.

Cost $80 to me....

Now I have a $6,000.00 deductible.

Office vist alone is now $250.00
Forget about the tests on top of that.
A few grand maybe...

I cancelled a scheduled appointment that I had for this month and told them why.
They said they understood....

Thanks Obama...

Under your old plan, you probably didn't have hospital coverage at all. If you did, you would have posted it.

 

[rdean]

I told you I tossed my old policy when it got cancelled I do not remember the name of the policy because like most people I tossed it in a drawer and put the card in my wallet and forgot about it. I now have a bronze level plan through Aetna

414 a month with a 6300 deductible. 246 more a month than I was paying for my old catastrophic care insurance

I am the only one on the policy as I am single and have no kids but somehow my policy has to cover maternity care and dental and optical for children under 12 not to mention mental health drug and alcohol counseling that I will never use.

My Agi last year was 283,659. I know that because I just got my taxes back.

So I'm sitting here Googling "aetna insurance for 168 a month single person" from 2000 to 2008 and what I found were numbers closer to this:

MONTHLY RATES START AT: $714 single / $1,808 family

and what you get is this:

When using your own doctors, you have
$5000/$15,000 deductible
60% coverage up to $10,000, 100% thereafter
Hospitalization
Mental Health – 20 visits
Chiropractic
When using AETNA doctors, you have
$25/$40 Office copay
Preventative Care
Hospitalization - $500 deductible
Mental Health – $40 copay/ 20 visits per year
Chiropractic
Plan includes a $20 generic/$30 brand/$50 drug card w/$200 deductible

------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps you should review that old insurance plan and see what the "fine print" actually says? Or maybe you could scan it an post it through one of those sites that lets you post pictures anonymously. You could ink out names and locations.

Link?

Don't you know how to use Google? The person before me provided no link. Why should I?

 

[Zoom-boing]

So I'm sitting here Googling "aetna insurance for 168 a month single person" from 2000 to 2008 and what I found were numbers closer to this:

MONTHLY RATES START AT: $714 single / $1,808 family

and what you get is this:

When using your own doctors, you have
$5000/$15,000 deductible
60% coverage up to $10,000, 100% thereafter
Hospitalization
Mental Health – 20 visits
Chiropractic
When using AETNA doctors, you have
$25/$40 Office copay
Preventative Care
Hospitalization - $500 deductible
Mental Health – $40 copay/ 20 visits per year
Chiropractic
Plan includes a $20 generic/$30 brand/$50 drug card w/$200 deductible

------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps you should review that old insurance plan and see what the "fine print" actually says? Or maybe you could scan it an post it through one of those sites that lets you post pictures anonymously. You could ink out names and locations.

Link?

Don't you know how to use Google? The person before me provided no link. Why should I?

Typical.

Rozman is suppose to provide a link to his own personal experience?

Link for the info you posted. TIA.

 

[rdean]

Link?

Don't you know how to use Google? The person before me provided no link. Why should I?

Typical.

Rozman is suppose to provide a link to his own personal experience?

Link for the info you posted. TIA.

"Own Personal Experience"? Well, it was my "own personal experience" to learn how to use Google. And I did. Why believe that and not this? Because you don't want to know the truth. If you did, you would spend 5 minutes using Google to prove I'm wrong. Only you won't. And we both know it.