The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > Great Debates

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 08-26-2011, 12:56 PM
Lobohan Lobohan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Smashy View Post
As CBO has said,
You're saying something that isn't true there. The CBO said, that the affordable care act reduces the deficit by 1.3 trillion over 20 years.

You're quoting an opinion piece by a puerile partisan. Maybe you could make that more clear, since you are giving a highly misleading impression.
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #152  
Old 08-26-2011, 01:59 PM
Fear Itself Fear Itself is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: 847 mi. from Cecil
Posts: 28,927
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Smashy View Post
LOL, who doesn't know about the exchanges? Read this, then we'll talk
We are not going to talk about anything if you keep quoting right wing propaganda that is utterly false. Those numbers are fabricated out of whole cloth.

You also display ignorance about the why employers offer health insurance to begin with. They don't have to, you know. Health insurance is a voluntary benefit offered to attract and retain valued employees. The employer who drops his health benefits will see his employees leave to go to work for his competitors who do offer health insurance, and he will be unable to attract new employees.

By the way, if employees decide to stay and opt for insurance under the exchanges, isn't that an endorsement of high quality coverage?

Last edited by Fear Itself; 08-26-2011 at 02:00 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 08-26-2011, 02:12 PM
Mr Smashy Mr Smashy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fear Itself View Post
We are not going to talk about anything if you keep quoting right wing propaganda that is utterly false. Those numbers are fabricated out of whole cloth.

You also display ignorance about the why employers offer health insurance to begin with. They don't have to, you know. Health insurance is a voluntary benefit offered to attract and retain valued employees. The employer who drops his health benefits will see his employees leave to go to work for his competitors who do offer health insurance, and he will be unable to attract new employees.

By the way, if employees decide to stay and opt for insurance under the exchanges, isn't that an endorsement of high quality coverage?
Not sure who is displaying the ignorance here, but I know it ain't me.

Some employers offer the coverage because they need it to recruit people. If what you suggest is true, then why have a fine for non-coverage in the first place? It's not a problem, right, since everyone gets offered insurance otherwise employers wouldn't have any new hires? In fact, why even have Obamacare in the first place, since everyone who has a job has insurance?

Oh yeah, because that's not the case. If Obama had only fixed that problem (the one in 6 without it), then maybe I'd be in favor of it (if it were deficit neutral, which of course it's not). But when lefties are pointing to some fictional analysis that only uses 6 years of expenses, against 10 years of revenue, they are deluding themselves. Pointing to the fictional cuts to doctors and hospitals as a means to pay for this abortion, when historically they've been overridden every time in response to their powerful lobbies, is deluding yourself.

You know it, and I know it. You want to believe that tripe because you like the idea of more socialized medicine, and I'm guessing a larger Federal footprint in the lives of Americans, which is the liberal Holy Grail. Fine, it's a free country.

But don't ignore facts just because you don't like the result.

Last edited by Mr Smashy; 08-26-2011 at 02:13 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 08-26-2011, 02:25 PM
Lobohan Lobohan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Smashy View Post
Not sure who is displaying the ignorance here, but I know it ain't me.

Some employers offer the coverage because they need it to recruit people. If what you suggest is true, then why have a fine for non-coverage in the first place? It's not a problem, right, since everyone gets offered insurance otherwise employers wouldn't have any new hires? In fact, why even have Obamacare in the first place, since everyone who has a job has insurance?

Oh yeah, because that's not the case. If Obama had only fixed that problem (the one in 6 without it), then maybe I'd be in favor of it (if it were deficit neutral, which of course it's not). But when lefties are pointing to some fictional analysis that only uses 6 years of expenses, against 10 years of revenue, they are deluding themselves. Pointing to the fictional cuts to doctors and hospitals as a means to pay for this abortion, when historically they've been overridden every time in response to their powerful lobbies, is deluding yourself.

You know it, and I know it. You want to believe that tripe because you like the idea of more socialized medicine, and I'm guessing a larger Federal footprint in the lives of Americans, which is the liberal Holy Grail. Fine, it's a free country.

But don't ignore facts just because you don't like the result.
Ironic, that. You have been told before that you misunderstand the whole six years of service for ten years of tax thing. Think hard about this now: if the affordable care act only seems to save money by offering six years of service for ten years of taxes, why does the CBO have it saving even more in the next ten years after the first.

Being mislead by right wing liars is forgivable. Not being able to see those lies when pointed out to you is less so.

Also, will you now admit that you misstated the CBO attribution above?
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 08-26-2011, 02:26 PM
Fear Itself Fear Itself is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: 847 mi. from Cecil
Posts: 28,927
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Smashy View Post
You want to believe that tripe because you like the idea of more socialized medicine, and I'm guessing a larger Federal footprint in the lives of Americans, which is the liberal Holy Grail. Fine, it's a free country.

But don't ignore facts just because you don't like the result.
I do like the idea of more socialized medicine, but not for the reasons you have been fed. Socialized medicine covers more people, with more positive health results at a lower cost than private health insurance. You cannot deny this, because it has been demonstrated world wide for decades. It just works, no matter how much you stamp your foot and insist it does not. You are on the wrong side of reality, my friend.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 08-26-2011, 02:50 PM
Zeriel Zeriel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Smashy View Post
Actually, 3 of them are broads. The other 2 are 8(a)s (one of the more racist programs out there... gotta love liberalism...)
I'm having trouble squaring basically every comment you've made with the claim that you're a "moderate".

I take it you have no idea what an ICP is, either, or what importance it might have for a government contractor worried about health care cost changes?
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 08-27-2011, 10:11 AM
septimus septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Sorry to butt in. Sometimes I skim these threads to learn how right-wingers think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Smashy View Post
Well, to edumacate you, I'm not conservative, I'm moderate.
The frightening thing is: In this Brave New World where Bachmann is the "moderate" alternative to Paul, Mr. Smashy may be right here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Smashy View Post
We can't balance the budget by spending cuts alone, I realize that.... but we also can't grow out of it through tax cuts either. We need to do both.
When I skimmed this, I thought Smashy advocated a mixture of spending cuts and tax hikes to balance the budget, and almost wanted to welcome him home from the asylum.

But on re-read ... he thinks budget balancing in an era of record-low taxation requires still lower taxes!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Smashy View Post
And that's why we can't afford this program, not when we're borrowing 40 cents of every dollar from Beijing as it is.
I hope you'll forgive me for not addressing your "substantive" points, Smashy. Instead I'd like to see your cite for this nonsensical 40 cent Beijing factoid. You don't have one? Then you fit in real well with the other right-wingers here.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 08-27-2011, 10:48 AM
Ludovic Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 23,275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeriel View Post
I take it you have no idea what an ICP is, either, or what importance it might have for a government contractor worried about health care cost changes?
Fucking health care! How does it work?
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 08-28-2011, 12:37 AM
Punoqllads Punoqllads is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Silly Cone Valley, CA
Posts: 3,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Smashy View Post
And that's why we can't afford this program, not when we're borrowing 40 cents of every dollar from Beijing as it is.
For the record, 16% (Cite1 Cite2) of US debt is owned by China. It's possible that you mistook the 36% of total foreign debt that China holds for 36% of total debt.

Last edited by Punoqllads; 08-28-2011 at 12:38 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 08-29-2011, 09:20 AM
Alan Smithee Alan Smithee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
You got a kid who just got his $1 allowance, and a man who just got his $5,000 paycheck, and you need $5. In your book, you take $1 from the kid and $4 from the man, and call it fair, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
No, of course that's not fair! Why should the guy with the paycheck have to pay more than the kid? Take $2.50 from each.
See, this just highlights the fact that liberals don't understand economics. Sure, Chronos's proposal looks fair, but go back to the original scenario. It clearly states that the kid just got his allowance, meaning money that was given to him, rather than money that earned, like the "rich" guy who just got his paycheck. We don't know how much the kid already owes society for all the money that's been given to him to support his lifestyle, but let's ignore that for a moment. If we want to get him off his dependency and have him be a productive member of society in the future, clearly he'll need a job. Now maybe the rich guy could hire him to work in a factory or a mine, but in order to build a new factory or mine, he needs to be given proper incentives in the form of reasonable tax breaks. So the kid should be taxed the entire $5, which sounds harsh until you take into account the massive subsidies he's been receiving all this time under the guise of "allowance."

Now, I'm not suggesting that the rich guy in this scenario should be entitled to harvest the kid's body for parts and mineral components, but really, if you have a better suggestion that doesn't involve taking property from the only person in this scenario who's actually created wealth, I'd like to hear it!
Reply With Quote
  #161  
Old 08-29-2011, 10:00 AM
Lobohan Lobohan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Is there a Poe's law analogue for whack-a-doodle libertarian stuff?
Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 08-29-2011, 10:21 AM
Kearsen Kearsen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Sorry to butt in. Sometimes I skim these threads to learn how right-wingers think.



The frightening thing is: In this Brave New World where Bachmann is the "moderate" alternative to Paul, Mr. Smashy may be right here.



When I skimmed this, I thought Smashy advocated a mixture of spending cuts and tax hikes to balance the budget, and almost wanted to welcome him home from the asylum.

But on re-read ... he thinks budget balancing in an era of record-low taxation requires still lower taxes!



I hope you'll forgive me for not addressing your "substantive" points, Smashy. Instead I'd like to see your cite for this nonsensical 40 cent Beijing factoid. You don't have one? Then you fit in real well with the other right-wingers here.
I don't have anything of substance to add but I would like to tell you that you have this posting style that irritates the hell out of me. Calling people pet names, paraphrasing their arguments from previous postings (I'm guessing), it's getting rather old and I sincerely wish a mod would put you back in line. You never argue the merits of whatever is being discussed but always seem to hand wave them all away due to some perceived notion you have that dismisses them. Good on you.

Last edited by Kearsen; 08-29-2011 at 10:22 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 08-29-2011, 10:29 AM
Lobohan Lobohan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen View Post
I don't have anything of substance to add
Fact. I keeed, I keeed.
Quote:
but I would like to tell you that you have this posting style that irritates the hell out of me. Calling people pet names, paraphrasing their arguments from previous postings (I'm guessing), it's getting rather old and I sincerely wish a mod would put you back in line. You never argue the merits of whatever is being discussed but always seem to hand wave them all away due to some perceived notion you have that dismisses them. Good on you.
You don't think mentioning that Smashy's nonsense about cutting taxes lowering the deficit isn't true is arguing merits?

Last edited by Lobohan; 08-29-2011 at 10:30 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 08-29-2011, 10:33 AM
Fear Itself Fear Itself is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: 847 mi. from Cecil
Posts: 28,927
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobohan View Post
You don't think mentioning that Smashy's nonsense about cutting taxes lowering the deficit isn't true is arguing merits?
That's Mr. Smashy to you, son. Can't be using pet names, now.
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 08-29-2011, 10:35 AM
Kearsen Kearsen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobohan View Post
Fact. I keeed, I keeed.
You don't think mentioning that Smashy's nonsense about cutting taxes lowering the deficit isn't true is arguing merits?
I didn't see Mr Smashy advocating a tax cut. I think he made a typo and septimus jumped all over it like it was fresh banana pudding. It is those types of hyperpartisan strikes that make me cringe every time I read the paper or watch the news (or for that matter, post here)
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old 08-29-2011, 10:38 AM
Kearsen Kearsen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fear Itself View Post
That's Mr. Smashy to you, son. Can't be using pet names, now.
Seriously, if you guys can't understand the difference then it must be that I am the only one with the problem.
I came onto this site calling elucidator 'luci', he posted once about me doing so and I stopped.
It isn't a 'what's acceptable meme', it's a 'what's appropriate and respectful'. If you can't argue the merits of the facts or lack thereof in front of you, and you devolve into pet names and offering nothing of substance (which I see a lot from septimus) then you shouldn't "butt in" at all.
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 08-29-2011, 11:00 AM
Lobohan Lobohan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fear Itself View Post
That's Mr. Smashy to you, son. Can't be using pet names, now.
Oddly enough, I call most of my pets by "Mr. [pet name]". Perhaps that's why I refrain from it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen View Post
I didn't see Mr Smashy advocating a tax cut. I think he made a typo and septimus jumped all over it like it was fresh banana pudding. It is those types of hyperpartisan strikes that make me cringe every time I read the paper or watch the news (or for that matter, post here)
If it's a typo, sure. But Mr. Smashy is a line item right wing ideologue on most economic matters. It certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility if you take this post into account.

Quote:
Seriously, if you guys can't understand the difference then it must be that I am the only one with the problem.
I came onto this site calling elucidator 'luci', he posted once about me doing so and I stopped.
It isn't a 'what's acceptable meme', it's a 'what's appropriate and respectful'. If you can't argue the merits of the facts or lack thereof in front of you, and you devolve into pet names and offering nothing of substance (which I see a lot from septimus) then you shouldn't "butt in" at all.
It really seems like you're the guy who isn't offering substance. You appear to just be complaining about the tone of posts, but not offering any substance of your own.

In any case, Mr Smashy and I are on a pet name basis. He calls me lobo and that doesn't bother me in the least.
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 08-29-2011, 11:07 AM
Kearsen Kearsen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobohan View Post
Oddly enough, I call most of my pets by "Mr. [pet name]". Perhaps that's why I refrain from it.

If it's a typo, sure. But Mr. Smashy is a line item right wing ideologue on most economic matters. It certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility if you take this post into account.

It really seems like you're the guy who isn't offering substance. You appear to just be complaining about the tone of posts, but not offering any substance of your own.

In any case, Mr Smashy and I are on a pet name basis. He calls me lobo and that doesn't bother me in the least.
Correct on almost all counts. I did not come into this thread to offer insight. In any event, I took care of it.
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 08-29-2011, 12:34 PM
elucidator elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen View Post
....I came onto this site calling elucidator 'luci', he posted once about me doing so and I stopped.....
Oh, hell, that's all right, Snugglebumps, knock yourself out!

I called Sam Stone "Sam, the Canadian Eagle" after the Muppets character, but he bitched about it so I stopped. Asked once if Scylla was the monster that swallowed Greek seamen, and he went totally ballistic. Never did it again, and this doesn't count, because its for illustrative purposes only. Just pointing out what a nice guy I am, compared to what a total shit I can be.

Anyway, "Luci" is pretty small beer. Some people who use it actually like me, so what the heck. I've raised kids, whatever dignity I have remaining probably isn't enough to try and preserve.
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 08-29-2011, 01:31 PM
Kearsen Kearsen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
Oh, hell, that's all right, Snugglebumps, knock yourself out!

I called Sam Stone "Sam, the Canadian Eagle" after the Muppets character, but he bitched about it so I stopped. Asked once if Scylla was the monster that swallowed Greek seamen, and he went totally ballistic. Never did it again, and this doesn't count, because its for illustrative purposes only. Just pointing out what a nice guy I am, compared to what a total shit I can be.

Anyway, "Luci" is pretty small beer. Some people who use it actually like me, so what the heck. I've raised kids, whatever dignity I have remaining probably isn't enough to try and preserve.
But I do like you! We just disagree on most things.

Last edited by Kearsen; 08-29-2011 at 01:31 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old 08-31-2011, 04:53 AM
septimus septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Smashy View Post
We can't balance the budget by spending cuts alone, I realize that.... but we also can't grow out of it through tax cuts either. We need to do both.
The phrasing "we can't grow out of it through tax cuts" makes it very clear that Mr Smashy is suggesting supply-side stimulus. (Tax revenues will eventually increase in a growing economy.) This was no typographical error.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen View Post
I didn't see Mr Smashy advocating a tax cut. I think he made a typo and septimus jumped all over it like it was fresh banana pudding. It is those types of hyperpartisan strikes that make me cringe every time I read the paper or watch the news (or for that matter, post here)
It was no "typo" -- see above. I will agree with you, if it's what you're implying, that advocating further tax cuts is mistaken, but I don't see how Mr Smashy's sentence can be interpreted otherwise.

We spent more than a trillion on stimulus like TARP -- but most of that was directed to prevent losses by big Wall St. investors. The FRB injected more than a trillion with its QE programs -- much of that was directed to investment in East Asian economies. I don't know whether to hope for another trillion of stimulus or not. It would be good if properly directed for a change but will it be? And is anyone other than Mr Smashy seriously asking for more tax cuts?

@ Kearsen - I do need to work on my tone. The fact is that I am easily irritated, because the matters we're debating are very serious, and I'm tired of the hypocrisies, strawmen, misrepresentations, and hyperpartisism.

But you pretend to believe Mr Smashy made a typo (please reread and tell us if that is sensical) and then jump "all over [septimus] like it was fresh banana pudding." Willful ignorance makes me cringe.

Last edited by septimus; 08-31-2011 at 04:55 AM..
Reply With Quote
Reply



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.