R
RCIAGraduate
Guest
That may be so, but what about people desperate for solutions like your uninsured and your working poor struggling to make ends meet and the many who need social services and supports?
- Status
R
RCIAGraduate
Guest
How would you talk to someone struggling with the issues, they agree with the Republicans on that one issue but see the Democrats better on ten or see them better more holistically and broadly like for the struggling both domestically and abroad (safety nets and foreign aid)? Or for whatever reasons, they really don;t like the republicans.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
As the bank teller said to Uncle Billy “It is customary when making a deposit to bring the money”.
You too have failed to bring the money. (i.e. the proof that Pope Benedict said “No”, it is not permissible for a voter to decide when a candidate is so horribly corrupt the the voter decides to oppose him.)
B
BT3241
Guest
Only if your a Republican.
U
upant
Guest
S
Sarcelle
Guest
Abortion has also killed more women worldwide due to baby girls killed in the womb.
So abortion which is regarded as a woman’s right here in the West has killed millions of women worldwide due to girls being killed in the womb.
So abortion which is regarded as a woman’s right here in the West has killed millions of women worldwide due to girls being killed in the womb.
Last edited:
P
pulchraesamicamea
Guest
The problem is, the Republican party in Korea is very far right wing.
They have been causing problems in my country and not upholding the dignity of life- pretty much anything that is regarded as important in our faith is being ignored by this party and only causing trouble in the Parliament. I honestly don’t know what on earth they are doing…
They have been causing problems in my country and not upholding the dignity of life- pretty much anything that is regarded as important in our faith is being ignored by this party and only causing trouble in the Parliament. I honestly don’t know what on earth they are doing…
E
ecuman
Guest
Your history is flawed.
T
twf
Guest
In what way? The events I described didn’t happen?
O
otjm
Guest
Unless you believe in utopia, we will always have working poor and health issues.
Right now I have a friend, in his late 60’s who has been stage 4 cnacer for at least the last two years. He is being treated through Kaiser with an experimental drug which has held his cancer in remission. Held - not cured.
The treatment runs about $45,000 per treatment - once a week,
Want to do the math on that one?
Oh, and he is one of the Deplorables.
And the Dems want a universal health care - with not a clue in this world or the next as to how we are going to pay for it, and the clear answer they have had to give is that they would do away with all private health insurance.
There was laughter on the Dems side when Sarah Palin said there would be death panels; interestingly it had a bit of a hysterical sound to it - because it was right. If you think for one minute - no, one second, that my friend would receive this treatment under the Dems helath “plan”, then please, I will make a really good price for you especially for some ocean front property in Arizona.
Do we need to work on issues?
we cannot even have an intelligent conversation on it, because any proposal with is within the realm of fiscal feasibility results in emotional backlash of “You want people to die!”
Before the Obama plan came up, there were 5 proposals from the Republican side, at least one (and if I recall, more than one) which were proposed by one or more doctors in Congress. As the Dems werre in charge, none - as in, zero - received hearings. It was "my way or the highway. And we were flat lied to in multiple ways.
The current plan may provide lower premiums; but the tradeoff is that the deductibles are so high, they will bankrupt anyone who has a low enough income to get the plan.
And you think it is going to get better?
the countries which have some form of “universal health care” favor plans which provide health mainetnenace. That is all well and good, but when you need health care - meaning that you are in need of operations the scene changes rapidly. Take a look at times to obtain surgery, for example, in Canada. Do a little bit of actual research.
Our local lead Socialist, the Bern, wants Medicare for all. More and more doctors are either refusing to take Medicare patients. In 2000, for example, a little less than 80% of physicians in Texas took such patients. By 2012, it was less than 60%; low reimbursement rates, stringent rules and horrendous paperwork (as well as the fact that reimbursement has not kept up with inflation) are forcing them out. In 2017 Medicare cost 709.4 billion dollars. And it was only provided to those over 65; estimates are that next year there will be 64 million people, with an estimated increase of 26% by 2030 - and that is just those over 65. And given inflation, that is not just a 26% increase of costs; as that does not account for any inflation whatsoever.
One of the members of Congress went to their home state of Montana and contacted hospitals there, asking them how Medicare for all would impact their work. The answer was that they would be out of business. (continued)
Right now I have a friend, in his late 60’s who has been stage 4 cnacer for at least the last two years. He is being treated through Kaiser with an experimental drug which has held his cancer in remission. Held - not cured.
The treatment runs about $45,000 per treatment - once a week,
Want to do the math on that one?
Oh, and he is one of the Deplorables.
And the Dems want a universal health care - with not a clue in this world or the next as to how we are going to pay for it, and the clear answer they have had to give is that they would do away with all private health insurance.
There was laughter on the Dems side when Sarah Palin said there would be death panels; interestingly it had a bit of a hysterical sound to it - because it was right. If you think for one minute - no, one second, that my friend would receive this treatment under the Dems helath “plan”, then please, I will make a really good price for you especially for some ocean front property in Arizona.
Do we need to work on issues?
we cannot even have an intelligent conversation on it, because any proposal with is within the realm of fiscal feasibility results in emotional backlash of “You want people to die!”
Before the Obama plan came up, there were 5 proposals from the Republican side, at least one (and if I recall, more than one) which were proposed by one or more doctors in Congress. As the Dems werre in charge, none - as in, zero - received hearings. It was "my way or the highway. And we were flat lied to in multiple ways.
The current plan may provide lower premiums; but the tradeoff is that the deductibles are so high, they will bankrupt anyone who has a low enough income to get the plan.
And you think it is going to get better?
the countries which have some form of “universal health care” favor plans which provide health mainetnenace. That is all well and good, but when you need health care - meaning that you are in need of operations the scene changes rapidly. Take a look at times to obtain surgery, for example, in Canada. Do a little bit of actual research.
Our local lead Socialist, the Bern, wants Medicare for all. More and more doctors are either refusing to take Medicare patients. In 2000, for example, a little less than 80% of physicians in Texas took such patients. By 2012, it was less than 60%; low reimbursement rates, stringent rules and horrendous paperwork (as well as the fact that reimbursement has not kept up with inflation) are forcing them out. In 2017 Medicare cost 709.4 billion dollars. And it was only provided to those over 65; estimates are that next year there will be 64 million people, with an estimated increase of 26% by 2030 - and that is just those over 65. And given inflation, that is not just a 26% increase of costs; as that does not account for any inflation whatsoever.
One of the members of Congress went to their home state of Montana and contacted hospitals there, asking them how Medicare for all would impact their work. The answer was that they would be out of business. (continued)
Z
ZMystiCat
Guest
P
pnewton
Guest
You get it, or you don’t.
Personally, I do not vote for leaders that set horrible examples of morality. Whether it be vigorously promoting abortion, or engaging in adultery, womanizing, and prostitution.
Absolutely! I do not know why you quoted me to say this, but absolutely. Not a straw man, but it is a point no one will argue with.
Last edited:
O
otjm
Guest
Providence Health Care, which operates 27 hospitals, 250 physician clinics, senior servies, supportive housing and other health and education services, is non profit.
They have an insurance program; in 2011 they spent more than 203 million in free and discounted care. And that number does not include the unpaid cost associated with Medicare, Medicaid or bad debt in that charity number. Where do they get the money? From health insurance premiums.
so I get a little tired of the claptrap that the poor are going without health care.
And Providence Healthcare Insurance would be done away with in the Bern’s plan - as well as the others, unless they are being confronted with reality and shucking and jiving about what their plan really consists of.
There have been numerous reports - generally no reaching the national news - of doctors saying that if they are forced into a Medicare for all world, they will not be forced; they will quit. So what is the alternative; forced labor?
I don’t even have information sufficient to be able to make projections of what the cost of the Bern’s plan would be; given that as is with those over 65, we are looking at a trillion per year for that alone.
Like I said, I have some really nice waterfront property in Arizona for sale. Basic, common sense economics says what the Dems are proposing is a pure fog of unreality.
I would love to see a non-emotional, fact driven discussion of health care. But when facts are given and the other side screams “You just want people to die”, it becomes not difficult; it becomes impossible.
Even assuming that the Democrats should win the presidency, the President does not make law. Congress does. And even assuming that they should sweep both the presidency and both sides of Congress, that Congress has to actually figure out how much it will cost and where they are going to get the money. The top 1% currently pays 39.48% of taxes. The top 10% pays 69.47% . The top 20% pay about 87% of taxes paid.
So where are the multiple trillions of dollars these proposed programs will cost come from?
They have an insurance program; in 2011 they spent more than 203 million in free and discounted care. And that number does not include the unpaid cost associated with Medicare, Medicaid or bad debt in that charity number. Where do they get the money? From health insurance premiums.
so I get a little tired of the claptrap that the poor are going without health care.
And Providence Healthcare Insurance would be done away with in the Bern’s plan - as well as the others, unless they are being confronted with reality and shucking and jiving about what their plan really consists of.
There have been numerous reports - generally no reaching the national news - of doctors saying that if they are forced into a Medicare for all world, they will not be forced; they will quit. So what is the alternative; forced labor?
I don’t even have information sufficient to be able to make projections of what the cost of the Bern’s plan would be; given that as is with those over 65, we are looking at a trillion per year for that alone.
Like I said, I have some really nice waterfront property in Arizona for sale. Basic, common sense economics says what the Dems are proposing is a pure fog of unreality.
I would love to see a non-emotional, fact driven discussion of health care. But when facts are given and the other side screams “You just want people to die”, it becomes not difficult; it becomes impossible.
Even assuming that the Democrats should win the presidency, the President does not make law. Congress does. And even assuming that they should sweep both the presidency and both sides of Congress, that Congress has to actually figure out how much it will cost and where they are going to get the money. The top 1% currently pays 39.48% of taxes. The top 10% pays 69.47% . The top 20% pay about 87% of taxes paid.
So where are the multiple trillions of dollars these proposed programs will cost come from?
O
otjm
Guest
Well, you have your certain mortal sins which you use to eliminate how many politicians you will vote for: the only problem being that you only eliminate those for whom information has been provided.
As I don’t recall Mother Theresa running for office, I suspect that if fairly applied, you will not vote for any politician - unless outside of abortion (there went most Democrats and some Republicans) and aultery, “womanizing” (whatever that means) and prostitution, you are willing to give all other mortal sinners a pass.
You are right. I don’t get it.
Interesting. I fail to see why any other mortal sin would not be a disqualifier.
Oh. That’s right - we don’t know what sins they committed. Free pass.
As I don’t recall Mother Theresa running for office, I suspect that if fairly applied, you will not vote for any politician - unless outside of abortion (there went most Democrats and some Republicans) and aultery, “womanizing” (whatever that means) and prostitution, you are willing to give all other mortal sinners a pass.
You are right. I don’t get it.
Interesting. I fail to see why any other mortal sin would not be a disqualifier.
Oh. That’s right - we don’t know what sins they committed. Free pass.
Last edited:
P
pnewton
Guest
The initial post I responded to was about a city politician with an abortion sticker. Having such a sticker is also not the only sin. Yet the point was made that it was a bad influence. Not all sin is equally scandalous. If you truly do not know what I mean, then I would suggest you Google the current president and his relationships with various women, and current comments about women, that is if you really do not know what I mean, and are not just acting obtuse. No, there are politicians, like George W. Bush, who were married once and remained faithful to their wife.
There are also those whose sinful past has not been a constant re-occuring theme throughout their life, like Barak Obama, who lived with a woman once, whom he proposed to, but then married Michelle and was faithful to his wife. It is simply not true that there is no moral difference between politicians, or that all are devoid of leadership.
I see such public scandal as a serious problem. I see lack of character as a serious problem. If you do not, then I would point out that I have never questioned how you vote.
There are also those whose sinful past has not been a constant re-occuring theme throughout their life, like Barak Obama, who lived with a woman once, whom he proposed to, but then married Michelle and was faithful to his wife. It is simply not true that there is no moral difference between politicians, or that all are devoid of leadership.
I see such public scandal as a serious problem. I see lack of character as a serious problem. If you do not, then I would point out that I have never questioned how you vote.
Last edited:
D
Dobby
Guest
I will never vote for Trump or any Republican that supports him.
U
upant
Guest
do you vote democrat?
M
Maximus_Power
Guest
I like to think I’m voting for Mike Pence.
blackforest
Well-known member
You’re both only scratching the surface. The overwhelming majority of women have abortions because they lack support that is financial, (e.g. for childcare and other expenses incurred in raising children), and social/emotional, (e.g. support from the baby’s father, grandparents and support from the mother’s employer or school).
Calling these concerns “convenience” just trivializes them. And women certainly need support well beyond the prenatal and immediate postnatal period.
Finally, for a relatively smaller percentage of abortions, we need to combat the bigotry against disabled children that leads to eugenic abortions.
Calling these concerns “convenience” just trivializes them. And women certainly need support well beyond the prenatal and immediate postnatal period.
Finally, for a relatively smaller percentage of abortions, we need to combat the bigotry against disabled children that leads to eugenic abortions.
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Would you cite the documentation for these claims?
- Status