“Fair” is a soundbite word that comes from focus groups. The operative word is “financially viable”. It has to stand on it’s own and not adversely affect the economy.
As for problems with the Obama brand that’s all on him. He rode in on a horse called “hope and change” and things got worse. There’s an old saying that Democrats coined that applies: “it’s the economy stupid”.
Isn’t this why CLASS had a financial viablility clause in it? Or was that for some other purpose?
I see, “hope and change” caused things to get worse. I could have sworn it was the gigantic mess the previous administration left. But now that I realize that little catch phrases have such an impact on the economy I’ll start chanting the right ones.
One that is financially viable. This isn’t the first time the CBO was wrong on the same legislation.
Congress makes the budget not the President. It was a Democratic Congress that Obama inherited.
Health insurance, just like health care should both be mandatory. It is the only way to go.
Democratic congress elected after some Republican retard started an expensive war for no good reason.
So what’s you’re plan for mandatory insurance?
Just like income tax. You earn, you pay.
Don’t worry, I blame them too.
I like that.
Good thing that Obama, in his signature issue, decided to drive down the cost curve by implementing tort reform (thereby taking as much as 20% of cost from all the defensive medicine),and by braving the Dem sugar daddies known as the Trial Lawyers Association. And not mandating more coverage, and more generous benefits, for premium payers.
Oh wait…
soooooo… The last election reversal of the House was because a bunch of botards didn’t understand their own mantra: “it’s the economy stupid”?
It’s strange that Democratic leaders attack the Tea party when it’s the Republican candidate they’re replacing. I guess the writing is on the wall that voters want accountability from their constituents.
Maybe you should rethink the idea of supporting bad fiscal legislation out of misplaced party loyalty and look to the future where budgets are adhered to.
I have no party loyalty. I do have loyalty to the belief that no one should suffer without healthcare. I do have loyalty to the belief UHC is the mark of a civilized country, and better for everyone in the long run.
What have the Republicans done to bring about UHC?
All I’ve seen those traitorous retards do is:
make false claims that lead to a trillion dollar war,
try to rationalize torture,
preach bigotry against gays and gay marriage,
spread religious intolerance,
union busting,
fight environmental laws. They seem to love a good river fire.
fight to remove reproductive rights,
oh and try to push the same old broken healthcare system we have now.
No UHC, just lots of lies about death panels, in bloody minded stupidity that UHC won’t work despite it working every good damned other place.
Democrats may leave a lot to be desired, but they’re not nearly as actively evil. Given my laundry list of complaints I don’t see the teabaggers being any less evil.
Bullshit. Tort reform would reduce the cost of medicine, including ‘defensive medicine’, by less than 1%. Cite: Congressional Budget Office report, 2004:
If you have a cite for your conplete bullshit claim of 20%, bring it.
:rolleyes:
Roll your eyes if you want. It’s the truth.
Very demonstratively too.
If an American needs healthcare they can’t afford, and charity or family help isn’t available for them what is the tea party platform on what should happen to them?
Should they do without: suffering, agonizing, and dying?
If the tea party position is yes then they’re savages who have no business giving input to society. If no then how should it be funded?
Read this
Then read this
Then read this, from the lefty whackjobs at the HuffPo.
A little more than 1% (to your credit, a number I did find in one specific cite in a Google search.. not sure which one it was, might have been wehateAmerica.com…)
So you are actually in favor of UHC! Great! So then, the reasons you oppose ACA could only be that (1) You aren’t aware that it saves billions overall, and (2) It was passed by the Democrats. Isn’t that pretty much it? Other than the fact that you have nothing whatever to offer that even you are willing to claim is superior to it, nor does anyone else in your party?
Hey, ya’ll.
When I first saw this header, I thought of the old Fat Albert cartoon.
“You’re like school in the summertime!”
“No class”
So the sick grasshopper is consigned to poor food and no heat so it can get better?
Thing is, we all get older. We all turn into grasshoppers. So either we design the system so that only the wealthy get the good care, or we rope in everyone, and then go to the providers and manufacturers with guaranteed orders from the goverment at volume pricing.
People just don’t think about this stuff from the top down. They extrapolate from the local to global and as a result don’t factor in economies of scale.