Why does the left count the ACA as one of Obama's successes?

[Little-Acorn]

I'm not squirming out of anything. I'm telling you that your Sunday School versions of economics systems are not reality. Both Capitalism and Marxism are things you obviously know nothing about, which means you haven't studied them, like most here.

I'm an MBA in Finance and career manager, management consultant, and now a business owner. I worked on Wall Street both for financial services firms and management consulting firms. So your claim I haven't studied them is wrong.

So man up and back up what you're arguing they are. I'm particularly interested in your calling BS to my stating Communism is defined by the Communist Manifesto. Grow a pair, back it up, and stop running, coward.

What you are is a little man on the Internet, who apparently understands neither Capitalism nor Marxism. We'll leave it at that.

TRANSLATION: I can't refute anything you said, nor impeach your credentials, which are far more solid than mine. So I'll call you a few names, repeat my standard empty denials, and run away, hoping you don't keep pointing out the truth where regular people (my enemies) can hear you, and I'll try to change the subject to other things. After all, my goal isn't to be right or just. It's to win.

 

[bendog]

That's bullshit. Yes, the idea was founded in the Heritage Foundation, but the idea never had broad support in the GOP.

We know what Republicans broadly support - tort reform and freeing up competition Amongst issuers in the open market.

And a solution to the Free-Rider problem, mandatory participation.

The idea of any kind of mandate has never been part of the republican platform.

The gop never had HC in the platform, but gop pols have supported a mandate. That doesn't mean the gop has to be saddled with it forever, but it's disingenuous to simply run from it.

Moreover, there are hard and soft mandates. The dems chose the hard because, I suppose, they're comfortable telling people they must do something or another. There's no reason not to have a soft mandate that simply penalizes a person for waiting to sign up until they actually get sick. They would still have the libertarian option of simply dying without expensive care.

 

[Little-Acorn]

By "you", little housepainter means government, not the people.

That makes him completely wrong, of course.

The economy sucks when the people don't spread the cash around... by buying, selling, and working.

Government has little to do with such activities... except to the degree it can prevent them, by taxation and restriction (the only powers government has).

Government creates the Middle Class. It's not natural to Capitalism.

Looks like little housepainter is continuing his 0-for-everything record of being wrong.

In fact, capitalism created the middle class, by providing the only means by which formerly-poor people could work their way up, AND a concrete incentive to do so.

Capitalism is merely commerce with no interference from government, except the obvious needs of criminal prosecution and contract enforcement. Finally landlords, kneecappers and unrestrained revenooers could no longer take everything that people managed to accumulate, and those people finally started rising into a middle class they could not have aspired to in previous generations.

Little housepainter is, of course, pushing government policies that reverse many generations of that trend, in the name of "spreading the wealth around" or other disguises for govt theft.

You don't understand Capitalism, but that's to be expected. Very few here do. Even less so Marxism.

Capitalism is simply economic freedom. It's where the players in a market (suppliers & consumers) make their own choices.

Communism refers to interestingly enough ... principles of the communist manifesto ... Which is why Democrats are communists, they adhere not only to the principles, but use the same anti-capitalist, anti-rich rhetoric to justify it.

Case in point, no understanding of either.

Caught in the spotlight beam, little housepainter can do nothing but deny, deny, deny, as expected.

Capitalism, being simply the absence of government control and regulation to an otherwise thriving economy, is anathema to the big-government pushers who sent him here. They're not going to like such a blatant failure to persuade people to accept and submit to their agenda. But there's plenty more eager shills where he came from.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I'm an MBA in Finance and career manager, management consultant, and now a business owner. I worked on Wall Street both for financial services firms and management consulting firms. So your claim I haven't studied them is wrong.

So man up and back up what you're arguing they are. I'm particularly interested in your calling BS to my stating Communism is defined by the Communist Manifesto. Grow a pair, back it up, and stop running, coward.

What you are is a little man on the Internet, who apparently understands neither Capitalism nor Marxism. We'll leave it at that.

TRANSLATION: I can't refute anything you said, nor impeach your credentials, which are far more solid than mine. So I'll call you a few names, repeat my standard empty denials, and run away, hoping you don't keep pointing out the truth where regular people (my enemies) can hear you, and I'll try to change the subject to other things.

Your support for his Appeal to Authority is noted. When either of you can make an argument worthy of debate, let me know.

 

[Rocko]

And a solution to the Free-Rider problem, mandatory participation.

The idea of any kind of mandate has never been part of the republican platform.

The gop never had HC in the platform, but gop pols have supported a mandate. That doesn't mean the gop has to be saddled with it forever, but it's disingenuous to simply run from it.

Moreover, there are hard and soft mandates. The dems chose the hard because, I suppose, they're comfortable telling people they must do something or another. There's no reason not to have a soft mandate that simply penalizes a person for waiting to sign up until they actually get sick. They would still have the libertarian option of simply dying without expensive care.

What do you mean GOP pols supported a mandate?

This meme from the left that before Obama republicans supported a mandate is simply false.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Capitalism is simply economic freedom. It's where the players in a market (suppliers & consumers) make their own choices.

Communism refers to interestingly enough ... principles of the communist manifesto ... Which is why Democrats are communists, they adhere not only to the principles, but use the same anti-capitalist, anti-rich rhetoric to justify it.

Case in point, no understanding of either.

Caught in the spotlight beam, little housepainter can do nothing but deny, deny, deny, as expected.

Capitalism, being simply the absence of government control and regulation to an otherwise thriving economy, is anathema to the big-government pushers who sent him here. They're not going to like such a blatant failure to persuade people to accept and submit to their agenda. But there's plenty more eager shills where he came from.

Name a country that does not regulate Capitalism, or any other form of economy? Since there is none, tell us why that is? What's the problem here if Capitalism, or any other system, is so wonderful?

 

[kaz]

I'm not squirming out of anything. I'm telling you that your Sunday School versions of economics systems are not reality. Both Capitalism and Marxism are things you obviously know nothing about, which means you haven't studied them, like most here.

I'm an MBA in Finance and career manager, management consultant, and now a business owner. I worked on Wall Street both for financial services firms and management consulting firms. So your claim I haven't studied them is wrong.

So man up and back up what you're arguing they are. I'm particularly interested in your calling BS to my stating Communism is defined by the Communist Manifesto. Grow a pair, back it up, and stop running, coward.

What you are is a little man on the Internet, who apparently understands neither Capitalism nor Marxism. We'll leave it at that.

You're a coward who talks big until you run into someone who knows what they are talking about and you realize is going to riddle you with holes, so you pretend you think you're above it while you tuck your tail between your legs and run away. You'll leave it at that.

I'm going to embarrass you, and you know it. Better to save the dignity you can, even if it's only saved in your own mind.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I'm an MBA in Finance and career manager, management consultant, and now a business owner. I worked on Wall Street both for financial services firms and management consulting firms. So your claim I haven't studied them is wrong.

So man up and back up what you're arguing they are. I'm particularly interested in your calling BS to my stating Communism is defined by the Communist Manifesto. Grow a pair, back it up, and stop running, coward.

What you are is a little man on the Internet, who apparently understands neither Capitalism nor Marxism. We'll leave it at that.

You're a coward who talks big until you run into someone who knows what they are talking about and you realize is going to riddle you with holes, so you pretend you think you're above it while you tuck your tail between your legs and run away. You'll leave it at that.

I'm going to embarrass you, and you know it. Better to save the dignity you can, even if it's only saved in your own mind.

Fire away if you can? So far, not so much.

Big hat no cattle as we say around here.

 

[kaz]

What you are is a little man on the Internet, who apparently understands neither Capitalism nor Marxism. We'll leave it at that.

TRANSLATION: I can't refute anything you said, nor impeach your credentials, which are far more solid than mine. So I'll call you a few names, repeat my standard empty denials, and run away, hoping you don't keep pointing out the truth where regular people (my enemies) can hear you, and I'll try to change the subject to other things.

Your support for his Appeal to Authority is noted. When either of you can make an argument worthy of debate, let me know.

When danger reared it's ugly head Sir Paint turned his tail and fled...

You're obviously not fooling anyone. You made your bravado statements, now back it up. Chickenfeathers.

 

[Rozman]

Because Obama said so...

 

[kaz]

Case in point, no understanding of either.

Caught in the spotlight beam, little housepainter can do nothing but deny, deny, deny, as expected.

Capitalism, being simply the absence of government control and regulation to an otherwise thriving economy, is anathema to the big-government pushers who sent him here. They're not going to like such a blatant failure to persuade people to accept and submit to their agenda. But there's plenty more eager shills where he came from.

Name a country that does not regulate Capitalism, or any other form of economy? Since there is none, tell us why that is? What's the problem here if Capitalism, or any other system, is so wonderful?

When governments control capitalism, they are not being capitalist. The fact that no country is truly capitalist has nothing to do with what capitalism is, which is the claim you made and apparently aren't able to back up.

And that weak shot completely leaves how my definition of Communism being defined by the Communist Manifesto is wrong.

 

[kaz]

What you are is a little man on the Internet, who apparently understands neither Capitalism nor Marxism. We'll leave it at that.

You're a coward who talks big until you run into someone who knows what they are talking about and you realize is going to riddle you with holes, so you pretend you think you're above it while you tuck your tail between your legs and run away. You'll leave it at that.

I'm going to embarrass you, and you know it. Better to save the dignity you can, even if it's only saved in your own mind.

Fire away if you can? So far, not so much.

Big hat no cattle as we say around here.

Fire away at what? I defined them, you said I was wrong, then bolted and now you're hiding.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

You're a coward who talks big until you run into someone who knows what they are talking about and you realize is going to riddle you with holes, so you pretend you think you're above it while you tuck your tail between your legs and run away. You'll leave it at that.

I'm going to embarrass you, and you know it. Better to save the dignity you can, even if it's only saved in your own mind.

Fire away if you can? So far, not so much.

Big hat no cattle as we say around here.

Fire away at what? I defined them, you said I was wrong, then bolted and now you're hiding.

Go back to the original post, and tell us all about Capitalism and Marxism? You'll be able to find it, if you are honest that is.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Caught in the spotlight beam, little housepainter can do nothing but deny, deny, deny, as expected.

Capitalism, being simply the absence of government control and regulation to an otherwise thriving economy, is anathema to the big-government pushers who sent him here. They're not going to like such a blatant failure to persuade people to accept and submit to their agenda. But there's plenty more eager shills where he came from.

Name a country that does not regulate Capitalism, or any other form of economy? Since there is none, tell us why that is? What's the problem here if Capitalism, or any other system, is so wonderful?

When governments control capitalism, they are not being capitalist. The fact that no country is truly capitalist has nothing to do with what capitalism is, which is the claim you made and apparently aren't able to back up.

And that weak shot completely leaves how my definition of Communism being defined by the Communist Manifesto is wrong.

Why do governments regulate Capitalism? Are they just being mean? If it's as great as you say it is, then why is it always regulated?

 

[RKMBrown]

1. They are missing their own projections of needed sign ups to support the bill by nearly 2 million.

3. The law has cost more people their insurance tjan uninsureds it has helped.

4. Major portions of the law have been arbitrarily changed or delayed without congressional approval.

5. By all reports unless you're indigent or cheat the system your payments are likely to increase, some dramatically.

6. Democrats up for election are running AWAY from it. Some say it's changed so much it's not the bill they voted for (blatant lies)

7. It is going to increase our debt massivly.


Where are the successes?

Why do people lie, cheat, and steal? It's in their nature.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Dems 2014: Hate the Rich and it's still Bush's Fault

 

[francoHFW]

In 2 years, no one will remember these growing pains, caused in great degree by greedy Pubs and their insurer cronies- and the tidal wave of total bs the dupes believe, of course...

 

[francoHFW]

We just hate the greedy, lying, polluting,brainwashing, screw the workers mega rich Pub rich, Frank...change the channel, chump.

 

[francoHFW]

We'the most capitalist of modern countries- that's why our out of control Pubs start the world depressions see sig para. 1. Russia may give us a run when they become really modern...

 

[Little-Acorn]

greedy Pubs and their insurer cronies- and the tidal wave of total bs the dupes believe, of course...

greedy, lying, polluting,brainwashing, screw the workers mega rich Pub

Looks like the usual trollbots are coming out of the woodwork as their schemes are debunked, with the usual namecalling and demands that we quit talking about it.

Shine a light on these people, and it's entertaining to see them scuttling around in panic.