To those of you who said the healthcare bill isn't going to affect us

[Bajjani]

http://gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com/did-you-see-this-caterpillar-says-the-health-care-bill-will-cost-them-100-million-dollars/?action=late-new

^^Thats an example of what it will do to companies.

One of the most interesting parts is: "We can ill-afford cost increases that place us at a disadvantage versus our global competitors".

So for those of you who thought this was going to help our economy and strengthen our workforce, :goodjob:

[Mantooth]

Oh, I know. We're all fucked.

[tony]

Yes we're all employees of Catepillar..

[bdydrpdmazda]

Yes we're all employees of Catepillar..

Catepillar is a very large company with a lot of employees, we should take this as a sign of things to come...

[Bajjani]

Yes we're all employees of Catepillar..

I wish I was as stupid as you so I didn't have to worry about this shit.

[Mantooth]

Yes we're all employees of Catepillar..You're not naive at all.

[tony]

I wish I was as stupid as you so I didn't have to worry about this shit.

lol Of course the intelligent response was to insult me rather than reply with something that would challenge what I stated. Try again, this time with effort.

[tony]

Catepillar is a very large company with a lot of employees, we should take this as a sign of things to come...

Catepillar is one company within an industry of MANY construction companies. If I want to base the state of the economy on one corporation's hardship then we've been doomed well before Healthcare reform. The gauge of how successful healthcare reform is or isn't will not come for years, all legislation is forward looking and rarely if ever gives an immediate impact.

[Bajjani]

Catepillar is one company within an industry of MANY construction companies. If I want to base the state of the economy on one corporation's hardship then we've been doomed well before Healthcare reform. The gauge of how successful healthcare reform is or isn't will not come for years, all legislation is forward looking and rarely if ever gives an immediate impact.

Do you think before you write this shit? Are you suggesting that this is a one time event that will not be repeated into other industries/corporations? Did I not specifically say this was going to happen yesterday, and look at this, it did. And are we going to make it to that 10 year mark to base the success of this bill? I don't give a shit how forward you look in the future, you learn to crawl before you can walk, you can't just say lets change shit to this.

The Law of Unintended Consequences <----

Do you know what the immediate impact of this bill is? Increased taxes. Do you know what this bill says? It says you get taxed an extra 8-20%. It says if you DON'T buy APPROVED health insurance, you have to pay more taxes. It says if companies don't provide you with health insurance, they have to pay fines.

Please go do some damn research before you say anything else.

[Bajjani]

lol Of course the intelligent response was to insult me rather than reply with something that would challenge what I stated. Try again, this time with effort.

Challenge what you said? That we're not all employees of Caterpillar? What the fuck kind of message do I have to type to argue you're stupid ass comment? Enlighten me on that one, please.

[tony]

Challenge what you said? That we're not all employees of Caterpillar? What the fuck kind of message do I have to type to argue you're stupid ass comment? Enlighten me on that one, please.

It would have been easier to say "I don't have a response" or "I can't," Sprinkling insults and curse words doesn't make you appear any tougher.

Mods can we move this to the political section? I think it'd be more fitting there.

[oneSLOWex]

It would have been easier to say "I don't have a response" or "I can't," Sprinkling insults and curse words doesn't make you appear any tougher.

Mods can we move this to the political section? I think it'd be more fitting there.

LOL does it bother you that much the way hes talking to you? If it gets moved and he continues talking the way he is, he could be banned, and you know that.

[punkr6]

Oh, I know. We're all fucked.

THIS

[S2KJD]

guys if you want CHANGE then simply show it at the voters box this November :goodjob:

[oneSLOWex]

guys if you want CHANGE then simply show it at the voters box this November :goodjob:

THIS. I will be voting for sure.

[tony]

Do you think before you write this shit? Are you suggesting that this is a one time event that will not be repeated into other industries/corporations? Did I not specifically say this was going to happen yesterday, and look at this, it did. And are we going to make it to that 10 year mark to base the success of this bill? I don't give a shit how forward you look in the future, you learn to crawl before you can walk, you can't just say lets change shit to this.

The Law of Unintended Consequences <----

Do you know what the immediate impact of this bill is? Increased taxes. Do you know what this bill says? It says you get taxed an extra 8-20%. It says if you DON'T buy APPROVED health insurance, you have to pay more taxes. It says if companies don't provide you with health insurance, they have to pay fines.

Please go do some damn research before you say anything else.

Any legislation that was pivotal had unintended consequences but there is a legislative process that corrects those consequences as time continues. No law is perfect when it is first drawn up, this is why it is a process. Corporations such as Catepillar voice their concerns as they did in that letter and the officials of which we have elected determine if those grievances are valid against the need of the citizens. This is POLS101 but you want me to research? Trust me I am very well versed in politics, come with something that I don't explain to my 8 year old on a daily basis.

[xxbckiexx]

Yes we're all employees of Catepillar..

That was a ridiculous statement, and as you well know, if the bill will effect a company of this size this much, it's going to be just as bad for other fortune 500 companies.

The worst part is this
"the legislation would discourage companies from hiring more workers and would cause reduced hours and wages for those already employed."

If a company the size of caterpiller is already this against the bill for economic reasons.. that can't be good. Others are soon to follow.

Not to mention morally, the bill violates 5 amendments:

First Amendment
Fourth Amendment
Fifth Amendment
Ninth Amendment
Tenth Amendment

[tony]

LOL does it bother you that much the way hes talking to you? If it gets moved and he continues talking the way he is, he could be banned, and you know that.

Doesn't bother me but I give respect and I expect it. I've never met you so I'm not going to sit here and call you stupid because you disagree with my opinion. There is no ulterior motive here, Politics is discussed in the Politics section plain and simple.

[Bajjani]

Any legislation that was pivotal had unintended consequences but there is a legislative process that corrects those consequences as time continues. No law is perfect when it is first drawn up, this is why it is a process. Corporations such as Catepillar voice their concerns as they did in that letter and the officials of which we have elected determine if those grievances are valid against the need of the citizens. This is POLS101 but you want me to research? Trust me I am very well versed in politics, come with something that I don't explain to my 8 year old on a daily basis.

Voice their concerns in this letter?

"We are disappointed that efforts at reform have not addressed the cost concerns we've raised throughout the year."

Democrats are making behind closed door deals and you're talking about a process? Really? Bribery? The problem with the Democrats is they IGNORED all the concerns, they didn't pay attention to ANY of the consequences, and they bribed their way through the voting process.

Take your POLS101 class elsewhere, I don't care what you think you know, you're talking like you don't know anything. You asked me to counter a statement that said "we're all caterpillar employees." The IMMEDIATE affects of this bill are increased taxes and costs to companies. The benefits won't be seen for at least two years. We're already in a recession. Where is the logic here? Explain to me how this is helping our country one tiny bit.

[tony]

That was a ridiculous statement, and as you well know, if the bill will effect a company of this size this much, it's going to be just as bad for other fortune 500 companies.

The worst part is this
"the legislation would discourage companies from hiring more workers and would cause reduced hours and wages for those already employed."

If a company the size of caterpiller is already this against the bill for economic reasons.. that can't be good. Others are soon to follow.

I don't like to reference the stock market because I don't think it gives an accurate representation but if you look at the market and specifically the Healthcare Industry as a reactionary gauge I would say that commerce is very much satisfied with the proposed legislation, and they should be. The industry will gain 30 million new customers which will bolster the industry on a large scale. When you compare that against the grievances of Catepillar in that letter I just do not have a lot of sympathy. They'll adjust as will most other large corporations not to mention they have until 2014 to do so.

[Bajjani]

Doesn't bother me but I give respect and I expect it. I've never met you so I'm not going to sit here and call you stupid because you disagree with my opinion. There is no ulterior motive here, Politics is discussed in the Politics section plain and simple.

Smartass comments do not earn respect so I give you none. Thats all you threw out was a smartass comment. I don't give a shit what you expect to be honest.

[Bajjani]

I don't like to reference the stock market because I don't think it gives an accurate representation but if you look at the market and specifically the Healthcare Industry as a reactionary gauge I would say that commerce is very much satisfied with the proposed legislation, and they should be. The industry will gain 30 million new customers which will bolster the industry on a large scale. When you compare that against the grievances of Catepillar in that letter I just do not have a lot of sympathy. They'll adjust as will most other large corporations not to mention they have until 2014 to do so.

Before I say anything, please elaborate....cause I think you may be retarded.

[xxbckiexx]

Before I say anything, please elaborate....cause I think you may be retarded.

The bill states that no penalties will be incurred until 2014 begins. Although as Tony said before.. the bill is in infant stage.. anything can change ;).

[tony]

Voice their concerns in this letter?

"We are disappointed that efforts at reform have not addressed the cost concerns we've raised throughout the year."

Democrats are making behind closed door deals and you're talking about a process? Really? Bribery? The problem with the Democrats is they IGNORED all the concerns, they didn't pay attention to ANY of the consequences, and they bribed their way through the voting process.

Take your POLS101 class elsewhere, I don't care what you think you know, you're talking like you don't know anything. You asked me to counter a statement that said "we're all caterpillar employees." The IMMEDIATE affects of this bill are increased taxes and costs to companies. The benefits won't be seen for at least two years. We're already in a recession. Where is the logic here? Explain to me how this is helping our country one tiny bit.

What legislation doesn't have closed door deals? That is a Washington problem not a healthcare problem.

My number one question that I have for people that want to quote increased taxes and cost of the bill, how do you think uninsured individuals have their medical bills paid under the current system? They obviously don't pay for it, the taxpayers do and yet the individuals incur a mountain of medical bills that they will never pay off. So whether we admit it or not under the current system taxpayers still pay medical bills for citizens and Illegal Immigrants.

I said what I did about being Catepillar employees because Catepillar employs maybe 100,000 individuals, shareholders are about 40,000 and stakeholders I don't know, we'll be generous and say 400,000-500,000.. There are over 30 million uninsured individuals, furthermore the job of elected officials is to do the good of the people, not the good of the Corporation, but that comment is based more on ideology. If you are a corporatist of course you would disagree.

[tony]

Before I say anything, please elaborate....cause I think you may be retarded.

You don't know the particulars of something you are so critical of? Interesting..

[Bajjani]

You don't know the particulars of something you are so critical of? Interesting..

No, Tony, I was allowing you to elaborate to make sure I knew exactly what you were referring to before I countered with anything. You said that they had until 2014 before anything happened. I think maybe you should go read that article again.

[tony]

Not to mention morally, the bill violates 5 amendments:

First Amendment
Fourth Amendment
Fifth Amendment
Ninth Amendment
Tenth Amendment

This one passed me by, you'll have to explain this one because the one that comes close to holding weight in terms of this bill is the 10th Amendment, the others you'd have to explai., I mean the 5th Amendment is a judicial process and while I'm far from a lawyer, its a stretch to say this reform hinders your protection from self incrimination.

[Bajjani]

What legislation doesn't have closed door deals? That is a Washington problem not a healthcare problem.

My number one question that I have for people that want to quote increased taxes and cost of the bill, how do you think uninsured individuals have their medical bills paid under the current system? They obviously don't pay for it, the taxpayers do and yet the individuals incur a mountain of medical bills that they will never pay off. So whether we admit it or not under the current system taxpayers still pay medical bills for citizens and Illegal Immigrants.

I said what I did about being Catepillar employees because Catepillar employs maybe 100,000 individuals, shareholders are about 40,000 and stakeholders I don't know, we'll be generous and say 400,000-500,000.. There are over 30 million uninsured individuals, furthermore the job of elected officials is to do the good of the people, not the good of the Corporation, but that comment is based more on ideology. If you are a corporatist of course you would disagree.

This is where it really kills me. Whats good for the people is to have a strong economy with a lot of jobs. This bill will make companies (not just corporations) have MORE cost per employee. That means less employees will be hired, and cuts will be made where cuts can be made. That means less jobs. That means more people getting free healthcare. That means taxes continue to rise. We're dooming ourselves to a cycle which will weaken our economy, in my opinion. This is going to slow if not halt our recovery.

[antj101]

guys if you want CHANGE then simply show it at the voters box this November :goodjob:


x2

[tony]

No, Tony, I was allowing you to elaborate to make sure I knew exactly what you were referring to before I countered with anything. You said that they had until 2014 before anything happened. I think maybe you should go read that article again.

I read the article and I know the Bill, as Bckie stated those requirements will not be imposed until 2014. The legislation is not immediate in terms of many of the criticisms that it has received and the Reconciliation process has not begun which carries the bulk of the changes that have yet been finalized.

[tony]

This is where it really kills me. Whats good for the people is to have a strong economy with a lot of jobs. This bill will make companies (not just corporations) have MORE cost per employee. That means less employees will be hired, and cuts will be made where cuts can be made. That means less jobs. That means more people getting free healthcare. That means taxes continue to rise. We're dooming ourselves to a cycle which will weaken our economy, in my opinion. This is going to slow if not halt our recovery.

Then you absolutely believe in Trickle Down Economics right?

[tony]

guys if you want CHANGE then simply show it at the voters box this November :goodjob:

This is very much true, its pretty simple stuff.

[Bajjani]

Then you absolutely believe in Trickle Down Economics right?

I believe in logical reasoning.

[Paul]

Politics makes me laugh b/c everyone thinks they are an expert... healthcare, finance, etc...

more fair and balanced from Fox News.

[Bajjani]

Politics makes me laugh b/c everyone thinks they are an expert... healthcare, finance, etc...

more fair and balanced from Fox News.

I don't think I'm an expert but I don't think I'm lost on the subject either.

[Paul]

I don't think I'm an expert but I don't think I'm lost on the subject either.

sorry but quoting Fox News is far from not being lost... lets be realistic they sell stories for the right wing - their CEO has even stated that their material is bias.

[Bajjani]

sorry but quoting Fox News is far from not being lost... lets be realistic they sell stories for the right wing - their CEO has even stated that their material is bias.

Where did I ever quote fox news? That was on multiple news stations last night, and, what I quoted was from what Caterpillar said, who, I do business with. So, think what you want sir, if you're really basing everything I said off me linking an article then, be my guest.

[Jblizzard]

I read the article and I know the Bill, as Bckie stated those requirements will not be imposed until 2014. The legislation is not immediate in terms of many of the criticisms that it has received and the Reconciliation process has not begun which carries the bulk of the changes that have yet been finalized.

how long did it take you to read this entire bill? I'm pretty confident you don't 'know' the bill.

[Paul]

Where did I ever quote fox news? That was on multiple news stations last night, and, what I quoted was from what Caterpillar said, who, I do business with. So, think what you want sir, if you're really basing everything I said off me linking an article then, be my guest.

Its pretty obvious my post were due to the link and I watched the news last night on both ABC, CNN and didn't see one thing about Caterpillar.

[Elbow]

WHO THE FUCK CARES!?

[loverboy_gnd]

WHO THE FUCK CARES!?

c'mon simon, i usually stay out of discussions on politics, but i have to agree, it will affect us all, especially the middle to upper class

[Bajjani]

Its pretty obvious my post were due to the link and I watched the news last night on both ABC, CNN and didn't see one thing about Caterpillar.

I actually quoted something from the letter, not fox news.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB40001424052748703775504575135881813148208.html
http://www.torontosun.com/money/2010/03/22/13323736-qmi.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100319-712530.html?mod=WSJ_latestheadlines
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/19/caterpillar-writes-pelosi_n_505993.html
http://www.kxxv.com/Global/story.asp?S=12173951
http://news.thomasnet.com/IMT/archives/2010/03/weekly-industry-crib-sheet-032210-house-of-representatives-pass-major-health-care-reform-bill.html?t=recent

heres abc
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/03/caterpillar-opposes-health-care-bill-aarp-and-ama-support-it.html
http://www.pbs.org/nbr/site/onair/transcripts/health_care_reform_passes_congress_100322/

[tony]

how long did it take you to read this entire bill? I'm pretty confident you don't 'know' the bill.

About 15 days.. actually I listen to unbiased analysis and biased analysis of the bill, gives me a pretty good understanding of what's going on and a point of reference to look it up myself and say that "I know the bill." Do I know every facet of the bill? Of course not, too much legaleze in it but I have a pretty broad understanding in how it will be enacted, who it affects and how it affects the citizens as well as the funding behind it. I don't claim to be a political savant but this is my absolute interest, I study this stuff when most are drinking beer are watching sports.

[Bajjani]

About 15 days.. actually I listen to unbiased analysis and biased analysis of the bill, gives me a pretty good understanding of what's going on and a point of reference to look it up myself and say that "I know the bill." Do I know every facet of the bill? Of course not, too much legaleze in it but I have a pretty broad understanding in how it will be enacted, who it affects and how it affects the citizens as well as the funding behind it. I don't claim to be a political savant but this is my absolute interest, I study this stuff when most are drinking beer are watching sports.

Well, to update your knowledge, taxes and costs will be in affect in approx 6 months of the bill being signed today. Just so you know.

[Paul]

About 15 days.. actually I listen to unbiased analysis and biased analysis of the bill, gives me a pretty good understanding of what's going on and a point of reference to look it up myself and say that "I know the bill." Do I know every facet of the bill? Of course not, too much legaleze in it but I have a pretty broad understanding in how it will be enacted, who it affects and how it affects the citizens as well as the funding behind it. I don't claim to be a political savant but this is my absolute interest, I study this stuff when most are drinking beer are watching sports.

Don't you think that is a little prejudice...? I drink beer while watching sports and beating my wife... :D

[Jblizzard]

About 15 days.. actually I listen to unbiased analysis and biased analysis of the bill, gives me a pretty good understanding of what's going on and a point of reference to look it up myself and say that "I know the bill." Do I know every facet of the bill? Of course not, too much legaleze in it but I have a pretty broad understanding in how it will be enacted, who it affects and how it affects the citizens as well as the funding behind it. I don't claim to be a political savant but this is my absolute interest, I study this stuff when most are drinking beer are watching sports.

that's fine and all - but while others are beating their wife (lol paul), drinking beer, and watching sports...and you are studying politics without actually being a politic, how are ya'll different? both you and others are 'waisting time'. Maybe you should take all that time you did in learning about one bill and put it towards something that can actually help prevent socialism..

[xxbckiexx]

This one passed me by, you'll have to explain this one because the one that comes close to holding weight in terms of this bill is the 10th Amendment, the others you'd have to explai., I mean the 5th Amendment is a judicial process and while I'm far from a lawyer, its a stretch to say this reform hinders your protection from self incrimination.

Like some of the New Deal legislation, this bill is very open to challenges on a number of Constitutional arguments.

First Amendment - with SCOTUS having just recently ruled that spending is an exercise of freedom of speech, the mandate to spend money for health care insurance is open to an argument that it is a violation of the right of free speech. In addition, there are religious groups that don't believe in modern health care, and so it will be also open to attack under the freedom of religion clause.

Fourth Amendment - Income tax was originally struck down because of the illegal seizure of property clause of the Fourth Amendment. It took the Sixteenth Amendment to give the federal government the power to directly tax people. This bill mandates spending (which is not the same as tax) and penalties for not spending. The illegal seizure of property article clearly applies.

Fifth Amendment - Penalties without due process = unconstitutional. And this bill calls for just that. Again, the 16th Amendment loophole used by the IRS regarding taxation does not apply.

Ninth and Tenth Amendments - regarding State and individual rights.

This will be interesting. I don't think it will take long to get in front of SCOTUS. If they rule against it on some of these issues (especially if they rule in accordance with the ruling that made income tax illegal), it will take a Constitutional Amendment to override.

[xxbckiexx]

WELLL Tony?

[tony]

Went and had lunch with the wife and just got back so excuse my absence. I'm reading/understanding your post instead of quickly reacting, I'll reply in a few.

[xxbckiexx]

Went and had lunch with the wife and just got back so excuse my absence. I'm reading/understanding your post instead of quickly reacting, I'll reply in a few.

Not a problem. Figured you had made your way to another thread, so I bumped it.

[tony]

Okay as I said earlier I am no lawyer and although my study is the basis for constitutional law I am in no way qualified to rebut anything you posted. I can only say this in my own opinion:

On the first amendment, with a stripped down interpretation of the first amendment in no way does this bill infringe on the right to freedom of speech. What you are referring to is the Supreme Court's ruling that Corporations are able to express their freedom of speech through campaign donations, this wouldn't be such a stretch if those donations were mandated. By this rationale the insurance that you are required to have on your vehicle would be unconstitutional as well even though they are placed at the state level, local governments would take them to court.

Fourth Amendment, I actually addressed this earlier this morning in a thread titled "State Rights." From my own understanding you are actually right, but then again the Constitution gives Congress the power to expand Commerce so the legislative process is well within their means to mandate coverage, and if the SCOTUS rules in favor of the states on this subject it opens the door for the mandates to be converted to a payroll tax much like Medicaid and Social security in turn opening the door for a European style healthcare system.

Tenth Amendment I'll leave to the experts, I don't feel I have a good enough grasp to go in depth with the discussion. My basic understanding goes back to Congress' ability to expand Congress and that if states truly were sovereign, there had to be a different outcome from the Civil War. Furthermore the Federal Government would not be able to enforce pollution standards or the Disabilities Act.

Fifth Amendment - Due process is the key term here, the mandates will not be implemented until 4 years when it has gone through a very thorough legislative shaping. Again this is just my own interpretation and not anything to be quoted but an infringement on due process would be immediate mandates without any rebuttal or scrutiny. Now if you go with a more broad definition of Due Process of just how "fair" is the mandate then that is subject to the courts.

[xxbckiexx]

Okay as I said earlier I am no lawyer and although my study is the basis for constitutional law I am in no way qualified to rebut anything you posted. I can only say this in my own opinion:

On the first amendment, with a stripped down interpretation of the first amendment in no way does this bill infringe on the right to freedom of speech. What you are referring to is the Supreme Court's ruling that Corporations are able to express their freedom of speech through campaign donations, this wouldn't be such a stretch if those donations were mandated. By this rationale the insurance that you are required to have on your vehicle would be unconstitutional as well even though they are placed at the state level, local governments would take them to court.

Fourth Amendment, I actually addressed this earlier this morning in a thread titled "State Rights." From my own understanding you are actually right, but then again the Constitution gives Congress the power to expand Commerce so the legislative process is well within their means to mandate coverage, and if the SCOTUS rules in favor of the states on this subject it opens the door for the mandates to be converted to a payroll tax much like Medicaid and Social security in turn opening the door for a European style healthcare system.

Tenth Amendment I'll leave to the experts, I don't feel I have a good enough grasp to go in depth with the discussion. My basic understanding goes back to Congress' ability to expand Congress and that if states truly were sovereign, there had to be a different outcome from the Civil War. Furthermore the Federal Government would not be able to enforce pollution standards or the Disabilities Act.

Fifth Amendment - Due process is the key term here, the mandates will not be implemented until 4 years when it has gone through a very thorough legislative shaping. Again this is just my own interpretation and not anything to be quoted but an infringement on due process would be immediate mandates without any rebuttal or scrutiny. Now if you go with a more broad definition of Due Process of just how "fair" is the mandate then that is subject to the courts.

I'm not speaking of corporate donations. Also, what about religions? As I said some modern religions do not believe in modern medicine, so to force them to pay for it is a violation of the amendment.

Possibly.. but I'll stick to my guns on this one.

9th and 10th stay firm as well.

In this instance due process is for judges instead of legislators to define and guarantee fundamental fairness, justice, and liberty. So without this due process, without SCOTUS approving this bill, it is unconstitutional.
Fifth Amendment may apply because of the "Eminent Domain", or 'Takings' clause in the last section of it. I.e. no just compensation for taking health care plans from citizens who want their plan, not the government's.

14th amendment challenge, since this bill effects people differently based on income discrimination and not a flat percentage or fee. The government is not providing for equal protection under the new law. The most interesting challenge I've heard mentioned however is the limits of the government to control or regulate interstate commerce. To do business in any state, an agent or underwriter must be licensed in that state. The business is strictly intrastate and thusly cannot be reasonably regulated by any federal code.

[David88vert]

I'm not speaking of corporate donations. Also, what about religions? As I said some modern religions do not believe in modern medicine, so to force them to pay for it is a violation of the amendment.


Technically, they are not receiving modern medical services - they can still refuse, as their religion states. Their religion does not state that they cannot pay for medical insurance - and even if it did - technically, the fine that they could pay instead goes to the general budget funding, so they technically would still not violate their religious beliefs. So it would not be a violation.

[xxbckiexx]

Technically, they are not receiving modern medical services - they can still refuse, as their religion states. Their religion does not state that they cannot pay for medical insurance - and even if it did - technically, the fine that they could pay instead goes to the general budget funding, so they technically would still not violate their religious beliefs. So it would not be a violation.

Actually, technically, they are paying for a service in which they do not use. A medical service in which they do not believe in. So technically, it violates their rights. TECHNICALLY. If you want to get TECHNICAL.

[tony]

But the Supreme Court ruling pertained to Corporate Donations in terms of spending being an extension of freedom of speech. As far as religion, choice of religion doesn't exempt you from taxes, nor will it exempt you from a draft or any other federal imposed law.

If the Supreme Court rules it unconstitutional it then yeah, the whole bill is nullified.

[DeeAOne]

Catepillar employees get employee discount at Walgreens so no worries!

i dont know much on this subject so ill sit and watch...

[xxbckiexx]

But the Supreme Court ruling pertained to Corporate Donations in terms of spending being an extension of freedom of speech. As far as religion, choice of religion doesn't exempt you from taxes, nor will it exempt you from a draft or any other federal imposed law.

If the Supreme Court rules it unconstitutional it then yeah, the whole bill is nullified.

This will be factored separately from taxes. Taxes are taxes, this is a completely separate entity which adds unwanted/needed cost for the specific purpose of receiving modern medical care.

[tony]

This will be factored separately from taxes. Taxes are taxes, this is a completely separate entity which adds unwanted/needed cost for the specific purpose of receiving modern medical care.

And that reaches the end of my knowledge on the constitution in this sense. I have never seen a commerce mandate done or implemented so it will be interesting to see. I will say that the implementation of this mandate is kind of a stab in the back Hillary Clinton, during the primaries Obama beat Hillary partly because he stated that his plan did not have a government mandate while Hillary's did, now look at where we are at.

[xxbckiexx]

And that reaches the end of my knowledge on the constitution in this sense. I have never seen a commerce mandate done or implemented so it will be interesting to see. I will say that the implementation of this mandate is kind of a stab in the back Hillary Clinton, during the primaries Obama beat Hillary partly because he stated that his plan did not have a government mandate while Hillary's did, now look at where we are at.

Yes sir. One of the reasons I've never supported Obama is because he's very wishy washy. Everything he's said he wasn't going to do, or is going to do, has been the opposite. And it was that way during election. Not saying all politicians don't lie.. but he's been 100% full of shit, instead of 50-75. lol.

[David88vert]

Actually, technically, they are paying for a service in which they do not use. A medical service in which they do not believe in. So technically, it violates their rights. TECHNICALLY. If you want to get TECHNICAL.



Wrong. It would be a fine for not getting insurance. The fine would go to the federal budget, and would not be separated or earmarked. They would not be paying for the medical service, rather they would be paying a fine for not getting insurance.

[xxbckiexx]

Wrong. It would be a fine for not getting insurance. The fine would go to the federal budget, and would not be separated or earmarked. They would not be paying for the medical service, rather they would be paying a fine for not getting insurance.

A fine associated with not paying for the medical service which they do not use, believe in, and is against their religion. Is it me, or do you just not understand basic logic? Doesn't matter what way you spin it, it's not right. It's not constitutional, and you are wrong.

[JDMbabe]

Yes we're all employees of Catepillar..

my bro works there too.. lolololol

[tony]

my bro works there too.. lolololol

And this is relevant because...?

[JDMbabe]

And this is relevant because...?

its not its fucking random as hell to lighten the situation, i am so sick of hearing about this... thought itd throw the intensity off and poke fun... idk ha

[xxbckiexx]

its not its fucking random as hell to lighten the situation, i am so sick of hearing about this... thought itd through the intensity off and poke fun... idk ha

this is a serious discussion among men. you do not belong. back to the sammiches. me and tony are hungry from being geniuses.

[JDMbabe]

fine back to the kitchen i go !

[Vteckidd]

What legislation doesn't have closed door deals? That is a Washington problem not a healthcare problem.

Will you concede that this was NOT THE PROMISE Obama made during his campaign. This is not CHANGE if the same "washington politics" is being used. I thought this was supposed to be CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN, and CHANGING THE POLITICS OF OLD, and CHANGING WASHINGTON. What happened to all that? Instead the democrats did business as usual, except this time it was on a much larger scale than anything we have ever seen before. Ive said it MULTIPLE TIMES, they BRIBED people for votes, they brokered shady backdoor deals, they completely ignored their constituents IMO (although that will have to wait until november to be proven), and if the replublicans did it this way i would be saying the EXACT SAME THING. How did they pass this bill? They didnt do it the way our founders intended, they used a loophole, which yes has been used before, to pass something that is 15-20% of our economy. That in itself is wrong IMO


My number one question that I have for people that want to quote increased taxes and cost of the bill, how do you think uninsured individuals have their medical bills paid under the current system? They obviously don't pay for it, the taxpayers do and yet the individuals incur a mountain of medical bills that they will never pay off. So whether we admit it or not under the current system taxpayers still pay medical bills for citizens and Illegal Immigrants.

I agree 100000% , we are all paying for it SOMEHOW SOMEWAY under the current system. If you have insurance, you pay for people that dont already as that is built into your plan. We do not refuse medical care in the USA even if you are dead broke. However, no one is saying that we shouldnt fix this current system. I watch Rachel Maddows show last night just cause i like to watch the other side sometimes. Holy shit what a bunch of lies she was spreading saying "the republicans want to repeal this act and reinstate the current system that allows THEIR insurance companies to run things. They want people to die and go broke" That is totally FALSE. No one has EVER SAID THAT.

I beleive it is an ECONOMIC ISSUE, meaning we need to find ways to LOWER COST so people can AFFORD IT. Offer Tax Credits to businesses to give them incentive to provide a healthcare plan, im all for EMERGENCY CATASTROPHIC insurance for people so they can handle the big ticket items. There were ways of expanding coverage reasonably and easily without the govt takeover. There were ways to attack this without allowing the Govt to now dictate to the insurance companies what they can charge. I mean you realize that now an insurance company must burden the SAME COST as well as cover MORE people for LESS money right? In what economic world does that WORK?

As i have said 10029309023920 times medical care is not expensive. What do we deal with most? UTIs, strep throat, FLU, colds, sprains, broken bones , etc. Most colds, infections, sprains can be handled my RNs or NP at clinics often for prices LESS THAN $100. We needed to expand the RN and NP to deal with the easy stuff. I mean if you get cancer without insurance or a broken leg ,yes its incredibly expensive and we should have attacked ways to deal with that issue. But just blanket covering everyone doesnt solve it IMO



I said what I did about being Catepillar employees because Catepillar employs maybe 100,000 individuals, shareholders are about 40,000 and stakeholders I don't know, we'll be generous and say 400,000-500,000.. There are over 30 million uninsured individuals, furthermore the job of elected officials is to do the good of the people, not the good of the Corporation, but that comment is based more on ideology. If you are a corporatist of course you would disagree.

I agree with you on this actually. I agree that Catepillar in the scheme of things is a relatively small percentage of the uninsured. But how many other companies are going to go through with this? What if all major industries as we know it see these kind of cost increases?

My question to you is if these fortune 500 companies start seeing these kinds of cost increases, is it worth proving healthcare? How do you think they will recoupe these costs? Prudence demands a man of your intellect to know that either they will LAY PEOPLE OFF or they will RAISE THEIR PRICES, or they will FREEZE HIRING/WAGES.

SO like ive said all along you will have your healthcare at the expense of your job because this bill doesnt attack the ROOT causes of COST and why people cant afford it.

[Vteckidd]

oh and mark my words, 10-12 million of the people out of the 3X Million uninsured are ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. Next up will be Obama and Congress offering amnesty to all illegals in a power play to solidify 10-12 million more votes to their camp.

it all makes sense now. What do they care as long as they can replace the 8-10million independent votes Obama gained last election. if they can pull 10-12million illegals to their side, polls mean nothing. AS long as Obama can hover around 50% approval and hover around 48-52% approval on certain policies, the illegals votes will put him over the top.

[David88vert]

A fine associated with not paying for the medical service which they do not use, believe in, and is against their religion. Is it me, or do you just not understand basic logic? Doesn't matter what way you spin it, it's not right. It's not constitutional, and you are wrong.

Do you not understad that their religious beliefs are on not receiving modern medical care? It has nothing to do with how it is funded. It could be free, and they would not want it based upon their beliefs.
Paying fines or taxes is not against their religious beliefs. You do not hear them say that paying payroll taxes that fund Medicare are unconstitutional.

I don't have to spin anything. You are wrong, and cannot admit it.

As for the constitutionality, that will be judged by the courts and is a completely separate matter.

[David88vert]

oh and mark my words, 10-12 million of the people out of the 3X Million uninsured are ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. Next up will be Obama and Congress offering amnesty to all illegals in a power play to solidify 10-12 million more votes to their camp.

it all makes sense now. What do they care as long as they can replace the 8-10million independent votes Obama gained last election. if they can pull 10-12million illegals to their side, polls mean nothing. AS long as Obama can hover around 50% approval and hover around 48-52% approval on certain policies, the illegals votes will put him over the top.

Illegals already get free medical care on US taxpayers dime. This bill will not change that.

Roughly half of the 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. don't have health insurance, according to the Pew Hispanic Center, a nonpartisan research group. Like others who can't afford medical care, illegal immigrants tend to flock to hospital emergency rooms, which, under a 1986 law, can't turn people away, even if they can't pay. Emergency-room visits, where treatment costs are much higher than in clinics, jumped 32% nationally between 1996 and 2006, the latest data available.

Sutter Solano Medical Center Chief Executive Terry Glubka wasn't looking to enter the immigration debate when she started lobbying for a clinic in 2006. She was trying to balance her hospital's budget. Between 2000 and 2006, Solano County saw a 13.1% increase in total emergency-room visits, more than twice the state average. Nearly 80% of the visits weren't urgent.

During 2006, the hospital had to write off $12 million in "charity care" -- or services provided to low-income patients who couldn't pay their bills. The charity helped create a $4 million budget shortfall that year. "They were getting the most-expensive care for what should be treated in a primary-care facility," Ms. Glubka says.

[Vteckidd]

Illegals already get free medical care on US taxpayers dime. This bill will not change that.

Roughly half of the 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. don't have health insurance, according to the Pew Hispanic Center, a nonpartisan research group. Like others who can't afford medical care, illegal immigrants tend to flock to hospital emergency rooms, which, under a 1986 law, can't turn people away, even if they can't pay. Emergency-room visits, where treatment costs are much higher than in clinics, jumped 32% nationally between 1996 and 2006, the latest data available.

Sutter Solano Medical Center Chief Executive Terry Glubka wasn't looking to enter the immigration debate when she started lobbying for a clinic in 2006. She was trying to balance her hospital's budget. Between 2000 and 2006, Solano County saw a 13.1% increase in total emergency-room visits, more than twice the state average. Nearly 80% of the visits weren't urgent.

During 2006, the hospital had to write off $12 million in "charity care" -- or services provided to low-income patients who couldn't pay their bills. The charity helped create a $4 million budget shortfall that year. "They were getting the most-expensive care for what should be treated in a primary-care facility," Ms. Glubka says.

i didnt meant to insinuate that they werent receiving coverage already because like you said, and like i previously said, in the USA we do not refuse care at the ER or at most hospitals. The hospitals provide care to tons of people who cant afford to pay for the service, and ultimately that winds up in our premiums as an embedded cost.

BUt this bill will however extend normal medical coverage to illegal immigrants, or they will grant amnesty to them so they become "citizens". SO i guess the process now is if you are illegal you cant really "work" for a company and be provided healthcare for fear of being caught or found. So right now i think its a catch 22, this bill DOESNT provide them anymore care than they already receive so technically they wont be "covered" although i dont know why the democrats include them in the "30 million uninsured" numbers. But if they provide them amnesty, then they will be allowed to be legally hired and companies , like all other citizens will be required to provide them care.

am i right?

[BanginJimmy]

Just saw this thread so I am a little late on this.



By this rationale the insurance that you are required to have on your vehicle would be unconstitutional as well even though they are placed at the state level, local governments would take them to court.

You couldnt be more wrong. Driving is a privilege the state extends to its citizens that meet specific requirements. One of those requirements is that you carry suitable insurance on your vehicles. You can easily avoid having to pay car insurance by not owning a vehicle. The mandate on health insurance is different as there is no privilege that is being extended with valid health insurance being a condition to be met before that privilege is undertaken.

[Julio]

Nov is around the corner..

I think all sides make valid points..

But... this is not the end... ONE WORLD ORDER ... SOON !!

[Nerdsrock22]

But... this is not the end... ONE WORLD ORDER ... SOON !!

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_r2mRQC23ItI/SyunYgj2zyI/AAAAAAAABvE/BTZy7r5l6Kg/s400/nwo1en.jpg

/approves.

[xxbckiexx]

Do you not understad that their religious beliefs are on not receiving modern medical care? It has nothing to do with how it is funded. It could be free, and they would not want it based upon their beliefs.
Paying fines or taxes is not against their religious beliefs. You do not hear them say that paying payroll taxes that fund Medicare are unconstitutional.

I don't have to spin anything. You are wrong, and cannot admit it.

As for the constitutionality, that will be judged by the courts and is a completely separate matter.

that would be you my friend.

[Echonova]

The entire system is broken, we are watching a game of three card Monty. While it's easy to oppose Obama's plan (and rightfully so), where were all the plans the Republicans have now to "fix" healthcare in the past? It wasn't even on their radar screen. In the end, the Congressman and Senators on both sides have the same goal...

To stay in power.

[Echonova]

As Reagan said "I don't believe in a government that protects us from ourselves."
and
"The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them away."

[Nerdsrock22]

"The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them away."

I really like that. I wish I could vote for Reagan now.

[Elbow]

I think half of the complaining from people is due to their OWN personal life, quit thinking about just yourself.

[Mike Lowrey]

So are you saying this is strickly an isolated situation? While I don't have enough information to determine the total effect, I do see this creating problems for several companies. This worries me.

I think that something this important should warrant more thought. It should not be railed through just so a president, who has been loosing support of the people, can claim he made good on a campain promise

[ARH1192]

Also, what about religions? As I said some modern religions do not believe in modern medicine, so to force them to pay for it is a violation of the amendment.

I bet they believe in it when their arm gets chopped off.

[Elbow]

Does this mean I can't be turned down for health insurance anymore? If so, sweet. I guess it will affect me.

[David88vert]

i didnt meant to insinuate that they werent receiving coverage already because like you said, and like i previously said, in the USA we do not refuse care at the ER or at most hospitals. The hospitals provide care to tons of people who cant afford to pay for the service, and ultimately that winds up in our premiums as an embedded cost.

BUt this bill will however extend normal medical coverage to illegal immigrants, or they will grant amnesty to them so they become "citizens". SO i guess the process now is if you are illegal you cant really "work" for a company and be provided healthcare for fear of being caught or found. So right now i think its a catch 22, this bill DOESNT provide them anymore care than they already receive so technically they wont be "covered" although i dont know why the democrats include them in the "30 million uninsured" numbers. But if they provide them amnesty, then they will be allowed to be legally hired and companies , like all other citizens will be required to provide them care.

am i right?

Actually, this bill MIGHT lower healthcare costs in that particular sector. IF those that are currently without healthcare quit going to the ER for every little thing, and start going to PC physicians, it might lower the cost to the taxpayers for them. Granted, that is a limited number of people that fall into this slot, but an expensive set.

[Elbow]

Actually, this bill MIGHT lower healthcare costs in that particular sector. IF those that are currently without healthcare quit going to the ER for every little thing, and start going to PC physicians, it might lower the cost to the taxpayers for them. Granted, that is a limited number of people that fall into this slot, but an expensive set.

Why do people go to the ER for every little thing? A regular office visit without health care is what? $40 tops? A trip to the ER just to go is $500, then you add everything else.

[David88vert]

that would be you my friend.

Actually, it seems that we are both wrong on one point. They don't have to get the insurance, and won't be fined.
"There are exceptions. Certain people with religious objections would not have to get health insurance. Nor would American Indians, illegal immigrants, or people in prison." - http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0319/Health-care-reform-bill-101-Who-must-buy-insurance

http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20100109/NEWS02/301099964

So your argument was moot from the initial statement.

[xxbckiexx]

Actually, it seems that we are both wrong on one point. They don't have to get the insurance, and won't be fined.
"There are exceptions. Certain people with religious objections would not have to get health insurance. Nor would American Indians, illegal immigrants, or people in prison." - http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0319/Health-care-reform-bill-101-Who-must-buy-insurance

http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20100109/NEWS02/301099964

So your argument was moot from the initial statement.


All that does is prove I'm correct. They had to write a stipulation in the bill so they wouldn't be taking certain peoples rights away, unconstitutionally. You said it wasn't, and would bear no impact. ;)

[David88vert]

Why do people go to the ER for every little thing? A regular office visit without health care is what? $40 tops? A trip to the ER just to go is $500, then you add everything else.

Because people are cheap,and don't want to have to pay at the doctor's office. They want free care. The doctor's office wants you to submit your insurance paperwork, or pay when you visit. The ER just takes down your info, and sends a bill. You don't have to cut a check on the spot.

[Elbow]

Because people are cheap,and don't want to have to pay at the doctor's office. They want free care. The doctor's office wants you to submit your insurance paperwork, or pay when you visit. The ER just takes down your info, and sends a bill. You don't have to cut a check on the spot.

But you end up owing more than $40 for a regular doctors visit. I just went to the ER with no insurance and I paid $80 there and just got billed almost 2k, if I could of waited until Monday to go to the regular doctor and only pay $40 and get a cheap prescription I would of defiantly done that. So you're saying people just don't PAY the money they owe to the hospital after a visit?

[David88vert]

All that does is prove I'm correct. They had to write a stipulation in the bill so they wouldn't be taking certain peoples rights away, unconstitutionally. You said it wasn't, and would bear no impact. ;)

You are wrong on that. You argued that the bill was unconstitutional as it was passed. You had no idea that it has a religious clause already in it.
They had that all the way back in the House bill. It was due to the current law requiring medical care for those mentally challenged, and children.

[David88vert]

But you end up owing more than $40 for a regular doctors visit. I just went to the ER with no insurance and I paid $80 there and just got billed almost 2k, if I could of waited until Monday to go to the regular doctor and only pay $40 and get a cheap prescription I would of defiantly done that. So you're saying people just don't PAY the money they owe to the hospital after a visit?

Hospitals have massive write-off's each year due to people not paying. Multiple hospitals shut down in southern California due to illegals using the services, but not paying.

[Elbow]

Hospitals have massive write-off's each year due to people not paying. Multiple hospitals shut down in southern California due to illegals using the services, but not paying.

Well fuck that, I'm glad hospitals offer care if you're not insured but I also pay my bills and what I owe people.

[Vteckidd]

Simon you could have gone to any minute clinic they are open 7 days a week

FYI

google cvs minute clinic

[Total_Blender]

First Amendment - with SCOTUS having just recently ruled that spending is an exercise of freedom of speech, the mandate to spend money for health care insurance is open to an argument that it is a violation of the right of free speech. In addition, there are religious groups that don't believe in modern health care, and so it will be also open to attack under the freedom of religion clause.
.

So now you get to decide how your money is spent based on what policies you support or oppose? I'm opposed to 2 wars right now, and have been since 2002... I figure I'm owed at least 5 grand in overpayments to the IRS. Please post the evidence you have supporting this so I can get my fucking big ass check.:lmfao:

[xxbckiexx]

So now you get to decide how your money is spent based on what policies you support or oppose? I'm opposed to 2 wars right now, and have been since 2002... I figure I'm owed at least 5 grand in overpayments to the IRS. Please post the evidence you have supporting this so I can get my fucking big ass check.:lmfao:

I've already been proven right. You're way behind here chump change.

[Total_Blender]

A fine associated with not paying for the medical service which they do not use, believe in, and is against their religion. Is it me, or do you just not understand basic logic? Doesn't matter what way you spin it, it's not right. It's not constitutional, and you are wrong.

The thing about Jehovah's Witnesses and other groups that "oppose modern medical care," is that the oppose things like blood transfusions, organ transplants, etc. But for everyday things like taking antibiodics for a strep throat they will still use doctors and hospitals. So while they may pick and choose what services they use they DO use modern healthcare services.

Its not "modern medicine" they oppose, its just certain practices that don't fit their specific beliefs. Jehovah's Witnesses are actually working with doctors by volunteering to test new experimental procedures that replace existing procedures that violate the JW's beliefs.

[Bajjani]

I'm going to sum this up. Health care bill is full of shit and ALMOST no good will come from it. A lot of harm WILL come from it.

And simon apparently is gay, tr00f.

[Elbow]

Simon you could have gone to any minute clinic they are open 7 days a week

FYI

google cvs minute clinic

24 hours a day? Not saying there isn't anyone, but I was in some intense pain and don't regret spending that much honestly. lol I looked up some clinics people told me and none were open 24 hours.

[Bajjani]

24 hours a day? Not saying there isn't anyone, but I was in some intense pain and don't regret spending that much honestly. lol I looked up some clinics people told me and none were open 24 hours.

Well then 24 hour clinics are failures!

[Total_Blender]

I'm going to sum this up. Health care bill is full of shit and ALMOST no good will come from it. A lot of harm WILL come from it.

And simon apparently is gay, tr00f.

Sum up what? Summing it up means you are coming to conclusions about facts that have been presented. What facts have you presented, what sources are you citing? What is there to sum up besides a bunch of bullshit conjecture and talking points courtesy of right-wing talk radio? :lmfao:

[tony]

Back to the original subject, I'll tell you if I was a Catepillar shareholder I can't say I'd be thanking the administration directly but I'd be thanking someone, their share price has risen 68% over the past year, where else would you get that kind of return on investment?

[Bajjani]

Sum up what? Summing it up means you are coming to conclusions about facts that have been presented. What facts have you presented, what sources are you citing? What is there to sum up besides a bunch of bullshit conjecture and talking points courtesy of right-wing talk radio? :lmfao:

WoW blender, I was making a joke because they started getting on technicalities of if something was or wasn't against someones religion...calm yourself and maybe you should go reread the whole thread

[Mike Lowrey]

Back to the original subject, I'll tell you if I was a Catepillar shareholder I can't say I'd be thanking the administration directly but I'd be thanking someone, their share price has risen 68% over the past year, where else would you get that kind of return on investment?


:facepalm:

Seriously?! Too bad it was because it was down so far from the year before. It's still down 20+ points from it's 2008 high. Not too good of a return, now is it.

[Vteckidd]

Back to the original subject, I'll tell you if I was a Catepillar shareholder I can't say I'd be thanking the administration directly but I'd be thanking someone, their share price has risen 68% over the past year, where else would you get that kind of return on investment?

well i mean if your stock falls 80% and rebounds 69% doesnt mean you are in the black lol

Now if you stepped in an bought when it was at the -80% mark then sure you made good money. I bought google at $323 last year and now its at $568.

[tony]

:facepalm:

Seriously?! Too bad it was because it was down so far from the year before. It's still down 20+ points from it's 2008 high. Not too good of a return, now is it.

Lets talk Investments then and the current subject. The thread was started based on the affect of the Obama administration and specifically the Healthcare Bill on Catepillar Inc. From January 21st 2009 alone to today the value of the company has almost doubled, anything before that is irrelevant to the subject. I know that when a stock tanks it can easily take a continued dive or it can recover, and for a company with a $620 Million market cap a recovery typically isn't going to be quick.

What I am saying is, is that yeah the stock was already in the shitter but that doesn't mean a recovery was guaranteed either, it could have easily stayed at $27.05 a share or gone even lower had the economy went toward a continual downturn, but it didn't. Also I could just pull any date out my ass and apply it here and say over 5 years there has been a 36% return or 220% over 10 years but those aren't relevant to right now. If Catepillar was facing bankruptcy a lot of you would be referencing the administration, because a $100 million dollar expense is apparently enough to warrant 5 pages of debate, where is that same sentiment when the economic climate has warranted a positive return?

[Vteckidd]

you still never answered my question tony

[Vteckidd]

Will you concede that this was NOT THE PROMISE Obama made during his campaign. This is not CHANGE if the same "washington politics" is being used. I thought this was supposed to be CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN, and CHANGING THE POLITICS OF OLD, and CHANGING WASHINGTON. What happened to all that? Instead the democrats did business as usual, except this time it was on a much larger scale than anything we have ever seen before. Ive said it MULTIPLE TIMES, they BRIBED people for votes, they brokered shady backdoor deals, they completely ignored their constituents IMO (although that will have to wait until november to be proven), and if the replublicans did it this way i would be saying the EXACT SAME THING. How did they pass this bill? They didnt do it the way our founders intended, they used a loophole, which yes has been used before, to pass something that is 15-20% of our economy. That in itself is wrong IMO


I agree 100000% , we are all paying for it SOMEHOW SOMEWAY under the current system. If you have insurance, you pay for people that dont already as that is built into your plan. We do not refuse medical care in the USA even if you are dead broke. However, no one is saying that we shouldnt fix this current system. I watch Rachel Maddows show last night just cause i like to watch the other side sometimes. Holy shit what a bunch of lies she was spreading saying "the republicans want to repeal this act and reinstate the current system that allows THEIR insurance companies to run things. They want people to die and go broke" That is totally FALSE. No one has EVER SAID THAT.

I beleive it is an ECONOMIC ISSUE, meaning we need to find ways to LOWER COST so people can AFFORD IT. Offer Tax Credits to businesses to give them incentive to provide a healthcare plan, im all for EMERGENCY CATASTROPHIC insurance for people so they can handle the big ticket items. There were ways of expanding coverage reasonably and easily without the govt takeover. There were ways to attack this without allowing the Govt to now dictate to the insurance companies what they can charge. I mean you realize that now an insurance company must burden the SAME COST as well as cover MORE people for LESS money right? In what economic world does that WORK?

As i have said 10029309023920 times medical care is not expensive. What do we deal with most? UTIs, strep throat, FLU, colds, sprains, broken bones , etc. Most colds, infections, sprains can be handled my RNs or NP at clinics often for prices LESS THAN $100. We needed to expand the RN and NP to deal with the easy stuff. I mean if you get cancer without insurance or a broken leg ,yes its incredibly expensive and we should have attacked ways to deal with that issue. But just blanket covering everyone doesnt solve it IMO



I agree with you on this actually. I agree that Catepillar in the scheme of things is a relatively small percentage of the uninsured. But how many other companies are going to go through with this? What if all major industries as we know it see these kind of cost increases?

My question to you is if these fortune 500 companies start seeing these kinds of cost increases, is it worth proving healthcare? How do you think they will recoupe these costs? Prudence demands a man of your intellect to know that either they will LAY PEOPLE OFF or they will RAISE THEIR PRICES, or they will FREEZE HIRING/WAGES.

SO like ive said all along you will have your healthcare at the expense of your job because this bill doesnt attack the ROOT causes of COST and why people cant afford it.

bump

[tony]

I had responded to that but then had to leave Mike. I've said it before that this plan isn't what Obama proposed originally and either people don't care or afraid to call him out on it.

In my own personal opinion (and it is just my opinion) I think this idea being thrown around that these companies will incur larger expenses with this healthcare plan is a big misnomer, a good majority already offer their employees health insurance (fortune 500) even to domestic partnerships. Small businesses will see tax cuts for insuring their employees to offset the cost. When I look at the this plan I honestly think that no I don't like everything about it but the proposal and the analysis by the CBO leads me to say "lets give it a try." Nothing wrong with scrutinizing policy but it comes to a point where people are just criticizing to criticize. When the other side offers up a better plan I'll support it.

[Bajjani]

I had responded to that but then had to leave Mike. I've said it before that this plan isn't what Obama proposed originally and either people don't care or afraid to call him out on it.

In my own personal opinion (and it is just my opinion) I think this idea being thrown around that these companies will incur larger expenses with this healthcare plan is a big misnomer, a good majority already offer their employees health insurance (fortune 500) even to domestic partnerships. Small businesses will see tax cuts for insuring their employees to offset the cost. When I look at the this plan I honestly think that no I don't like everything about it but the proposal and the analysis by the CBO leads me to say "lets give it a try." Nothing wrong with scrutinizing policy but it comes to a point where people are just criticizing to criticize. When the other side offers up a better plan I'll support it.

Well, my family (my Dad and I) own a company one company that is netting approx $20 million revenue. We offer insurance and pay a portion, also they can pick any family plan etc they want to cover spouse/children. Our costs from this bill are estimated to double if not more.

Small businesses and huge business are going to be fine, imo. They'll have more cost but nothing so obscene it will shut them down. The problem is the companies that make 10-100 million. They'll see harder hits based off the % of their NI.

I could talk out a drastic scenario but it'd be completely nothing more than a off the wall theory of what COULD happen if majority of these mid-sized companies bite the bullet.

[Bajjani]

Lets talk Investments then and the current subject. The thread was started based on the affect of the Obama administration and specifically the Healthcare Bill on Catepillar Inc. From January 21st 2009 alone to today the value of the company has almost doubled, anything before that is irrelevant to the subject. I know that when a stock tanks it can easily take a continued dive or it can recover, and for a company with a $620 Million market cap a recovery typically isn't going to be quick.

What I am saying is, is that yeah the stock was already in the shitter but that doesn't mean a recovery was guaranteed either, it could have easily stayed at $27.05 a share or gone even lower had the economy went toward a continual downturn, but it didn't. Also I could just pull any date out my ass and apply it here and say over 5 years there has been a 36% return or 220% over 10 years but those aren't relevant to right now. If Catepillar was facing bankruptcy a lot of you would be referencing the administration, because a $100 million dollar expense is apparently enough to warrant 5 pages of debate, where is that same sentiment when the economic climate has warranted a positive return?

We could talk stock all day long but it isn't always an accurate assessment of how a company is doing. Stocks can be over valued, undervalued, and they are a lot of times based of predictions of big investors, the expected quarterly earnings, things that haven't really happened but COULD happen. Also, yes the investment may have been great up until now and the economy was 'slowly turning around,' but if people have to tighten their belts more and have less money to spend, that WILL slow the economy.

[Total_Blender]

The "change" I voted for was a change to more progressive policies, and Obama has delivered on that so far. Not quite to the extent that I had hoped, but as far as I know we are no longer torturing detainees at Gitmo, the Auto industry has been saved, the banks are under a closer watch now, etc. The economy is making forward momentum.

As far as the "deals," the Cornhusker kickback was not in the final legislation.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/88407-centrist-democrats-split-over-reconciliation-bill

As for the reconciliation process, it was about as transparent as any legislative process has ever been. I really didn't expect Obama to change the actual process much as that all has do do with Congress. Pretty much everything he promised (posting bills online before votes etc) is stuff that already happens. Everything that goes before Congress is posted in the THOMAS database, and the various Healthcare bills have been there for you all to read for months on end.

[Vteckidd]

I had responded to that but then had to leave Mike. I've said it before that this plan isn't what Obama proposed originally and either people don't care or afraid to call him out on it.

In my own personal opinion (and it is just my opinion) I think this idea being thrown around that these companies will incur larger expenses with this healthcare plan is a big misnomer, a good majority already offer their employees health insurance (fortune 500) even to domestic partnerships. Small businesses will see tax cuts for insuring their employees to offset the cost. When I look at the this plan I honestly think that no I don't like everything about it but the proposal and the analysis by the CBO leads me to say "lets give it a try." Nothing wrong with scrutinizing policy but it comes to a point where people are just criticizing to criticize. When the other side offers up a better plan I'll support it.

I agree that most 50+ employee business offer healthcare already but thats another argument for another day.

Do you REALLY truly believe the CBO? There are major holes in there numbers, like counting the Medicare Savings twice ("saving the medicare 500billion, then spending it to fund healthcare isnt really a "savings") 10 years reducing the deficit by 138 billion (10 years of taxes , 6 years of benefits).

In fact most people say if you look at this program 10 years of taxes 10 years of benefits, you are looking at over 2 trillion in costs, at least 1.5 trillion added to the deficit by 2020.

[Bajjani]

The "change" I voted for was a change to more progressive policies, and Obama has delivered on that so far. Not quite to the extent that I had hoped, but as far as I know we are no longer torturing detainees at Gitmo, the Auto industry has been saved, the banks are under a closer watch now, etc. The economy is making forward momentum.

As far as the "deals," the Cornhusker kickback was not in the final legislation.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/88407-centrist-democrats-split-over-reconciliation-bill

As for the reconciliation process, it was about as transparent as any legislative process has ever been. I really didn't expect Obama to change the actual process much as that all has do do with Congress. Pretty much everything he promised (posting bills online before votes etc) is stuff that already happens. Everything that goes before Congress is posted in the THOMAS database, and the various Healthcare bills have been there for you all to read for months on end.

Do you honestly believe that this healthcare bill will bring nothing but good?

[Vteckidd]

The "change" I voted for was a change to more progressive policies, and Obama has delivered on that so far. Not quite to the extent that I had hoped, but as far as I know we are no longer torturing detainees at Gitmo, the Auto industry has been saved, the banks are under a closer watch now, etc. The economy is making forward momentum.

As far as the "deals," the Cornhusker kickback was not in the final legislation.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/88407-centrist-democrats-split-over-reconciliation-bill

As for the reconciliation process, it was about as transparent as any legislative process has ever been. I really didn't expect Obama to change the actual process much as that all has do do with Congress. Pretty much everything he promised (posting bills online before votes etc) is stuff that already happens. Everything that goes before Congress is posted in the THOMAS database, and the various Healthcare bills have been there for you all to read for months on end.

totally disagree, but point noted

[Vteckidd]

Do you honestly believe that this healthcare bill will bring nothing but good?

yes hes a progressive, they are not satisfied until the govt has total control over every social aspect of your life in the name of social and economic justice. If its good for you the govt must provide it, is their mantra.

They dont believe in capitalism , or "the rich". They believe in a star trek utopia where everyone is happy and equal in all facets of life from money to housing to cars to personal possessions.

Progressivism is not that much different than Communism or Marxism.

Edit: The fact that he says the banks are under a close eye , the Auto Industry is saved, the economy is getting better shows the complete disconnect he is experiencing. None of those are true in the slightest

[Bajjani]

yes hes a progressive, they are not satisfied until the govt has total control over every social aspect of your life in the name of social and economic justice. If its good for you the govt must provide it, is their mantra.

They dont believe in capitalism , or "the rich". They believe in a star trek utopia where everyone is happy and equal in all facets of life from money to housing to cars to personal possessions.

Progressivism is not that much different than Communism or Marxism.

Edit: The fact that he says the banks are under a close eye , the Auto Industry is saved, the economy is getting better shows the complete disconnect he is experiencing. None of those are true in the slightest

I know this much, it isn't the first auto bailout won't be the last, but the weather is killing my sinuses and I have to much of a headache to want to debate today so I'm trying to keep it short. I posted a link from CNN that got moved to the political section that had a meeting with the Mayor of Mass. and he described the healthcare bill as a sundae. It was a pile of dirt with cherries on top. He also out right called Obama a liar and gave examples on how he lied.

[LizBiz]

I demand a National Naptime Hour..... That's my healthcare. OBAMA!!!

[Total_Blender]

yes hes a progressive, they are not satisfied until the govt has total control over every social aspect of your life in the name of social and economic justice. If its good for you the govt must provide it, is their mantra.

They dont believe in capitalism , or "the rich". They believe in a star trek utopia where everyone is happy and equal in all facets of life from money to housing to cars to personal possessions.

Progressivism is not that much different than Communism or Marxism.

Edit: The fact that he says the banks are under a close eye , the Auto Industry is saved, the economy is getting better shows the complete disconnect he is experiencing. None of those are true in the slightest

You regurgitate that crap so well that when I read your posts its like I'm actually watching Glenn Beck. Maybe you could add some bitchin' American flag graphics, and some scrolling talking points to your signature to complete the effect.


Mayor of Mass.

WTF man, Mass. is a state. States don't have mayors, they have Governor's, legislators, and attorneys general.

Also, it seems the Sonny has appointed a "Special Atorney General" to file suit against the Gov't because Thurbert Baker won't do it.

Sonny says he has a team of attorneys who will work for free, but I am sure this will end up costing the state a shitload of money with no real results. For one thing, an attorney's time is never free. These guys are getting something form Sonny, probably either political patronage appointments or financial backing and endorsements to run for public office. Secondly, it will cost us the salary that will be paid to the "Special Attorney General." There are also court costs, and the time and resources that will be spent on this that could be diverted to other things like the HUGE ASS HOLE IN THE BUDGET.

The GOP's mantra is that there are "no free lunches," so does Sonny really think he can pull a fast one on us and act like this isn't going to cost anything? It seems like all he's trying to do lately is just save whatever political capital he's got left with the Teabagging set.

[Vteckidd]

You regurgitate that crap so well that when I read your posts its like I'm actually watching Glenn Beck. Maybe you could add some bitchin' American flag graphics, and some scrolling talking points to your signature to complete the effect.


LOL see thats what i love is you automatically think im too stupid to think for myself that i MUST have gotten it from Glenn BEck.

Im not gonna sit here and argue, thats what YOU BELIEVE, its exactly what YOU WROTE. I can go pull all your posts up if i cared enough of had the time.

You just said you were happy that a obama was advancing PROGRESSIVE policies. Are you too stupid to know what Progressive means?

Progressives advocate SOCIAL JUSTICE and ECONOMIC JUSTICE through redistribution of wealth. they believe they know whats best for other people (at the GOVT level) and are largely for legislating or implementing policies that restrict free or independent choices.

Everyone deserves a home (fannie and freddie)
Everyone deserves healthcare
Everyone deserves a good paying job (raising mimimum wage, creating more govt jobs)

You believe that Govt knows best, that rich business owners are evil, and that everyone should be given the same things to "even" the playing field.

It is NOT that much different than communism.

Im just interpreting your own words, maybe you should think before you type

[Julio]

Also, it seems the Sonny has appointed a "Special Atorney General" to file suit against the Gov't because Thurbert Baker won't do it.
Sonny says he has a team of attorneys who will work for free, but I am sure this will end up costing the state a shitload of money with no real results. For one thing, an attorney's time is never free. These guys are getting something form Sonny, probably either political patronage appointments or financial backing and endorsements to run for public office. Secondly, it will cost us the salary that will be paid to the "Special Attorney General." There are also court costs, and the time and resources that will be spent on this that could be diverted to other things like the HUGE ASS HOLE IN THE BUDGET.

The GOP's mantra is that there are "no free lunches," so does Sonny really think he can pull a fast one on us and act like this isn't going to cost anything? It seems like all he's trying to do lately is just save whatever political capital he's got left with the Teabagging set.



" free " Lawyers probably been on the budget for a long time.. lol

[Total_Blender]

V-teckidd, thats exactly the kind of crap Glenn Beck has been spouting all week. I know this because I actually watched his show from 3/23.

Progressivism and capitalism can and do exist side by side. Places with socialized healthcare like Canada, Great Britain, and France all still have capitalist classes. London has more millionaires than anywhere else in the world.

Its not about eliminating the people at the top and making everyone "equal," its about making sure that people have adequate resources to cover their most basic needs and that all human life is treated with a basic minimum of dignity and respect.

[xxbckiexx]

yes hes a progressive, they are not satisfied until the govt has total control over every social aspect of your life in the name of social and economic justice. If its good for you the govt must provide it, is their mantra.

They dont believe in capitalism , or "the rich". They believe in a star trek utopia where everyone is happy and equal in all facets of life from money to housing to cars to personal possessions.

Progressivism is not that much different than Communism or Marxism.

Edit: The fact that he says the banks are under a close eye , the Auto Industry is saved, the economy is getting better shows the complete disconnect he is experiencing. None of those are true in the slightest

beat me to it. Not to mention you can't even make an Obama joke around this clown. He gets offended and starts defending him. SO WHAT IF HE THROWS LIKE A GIRL, HE CAN STILL PRESIDENTMORE BETTAR THENBUSH EVAR CAN. lolololool.

[xxbckiexx]

V-teckidd, thats exactly the kind of crap Glenn Beck has been spouting all week. I know this because I actually watched his show from 3/23.

Progressivism and capitalism can and do exist side by side. Places with socialized healthcare like Canada, Great Britain, and France all still have capitalist classes. London has more millionaires than anywhere else in the world.

Its not about eliminating the people at the top and making everyone "equal," its about making sure that people have adequate resources to cover their most basic needs and that all human life is treated with a basic minimum of dignity and respect.

All human life is treated that way in the US. Those who don't have enough to cover their "basic needs" choose to live their life this way. They choose to be in the fry line at mcdonalds, not graduate college, or maybe even high school. They choose to be that way. Stop feeling so sap for everyone else. Everyone has equal rights in this country, it's up to you to afford the extras.

[Vteckidd]

Its not about eliminating the people at the top and making everyone "equal," its about making sure that people have adequate resources to cover their most basic needs and that all human life is treated with a basic minimum of dignity and respect.

So what do you call that? Social Justice LOL do you even know what you are talking about ? Its evident you like to pick out what you like and what you dont like to fit your argument.

I thought we were already guaranteed all this with the Constitution. Life, Liberty, PURSUIT of HAPPINESS? ring a bell?

You guys believe there should be no homeless, no poor, no lower class. You believe that legislating things that YOU think are RIGHTS will level the playing field. that is the absolute OPPOSITE of a capitalistic society. Rights do not come from the GOVT, they are protected by the govt which serves the people., or it used too.

Your theories would have some merit if everyone was truly working and trying to get ahead, etc. But its not like that. Most people that suck on the govt teet, never get off, for some reason, i wonder why. Complacency.

I mean what about the second bill of rights? what about Single Payer? these are all progressive policies. Its designed to TAKE CARE of the population, not empower it to achieve it on its own.

I wouldnt know i havent watched Beck in prob 2 weeks.

[Vteckidd]

All human life is treated that way in the US. Those who don't have enough to cover their "basic needs" choose to live their life this way. They choose to be in the fry line at mcdonalds, not graduate college, or maybe even high school. They choose to be that way. Stop feeling so sap for everyone else. Everyone has equal rights in this country, it's up to you to afford the extras.
progressives dont believe that, they believe that people who are worse off than "that guy" are like that because the system is unfair. Its their job to "spread the wealth around" or dictate what is right to you. I mean look at all the examples

Van Jones
Biden saying "we are going to run the insurance companies"
Takeover of GM
Healthcare
Cap N Trade

These are all heavily progressive/communist policies or agendas or agents. Blender is the minority most people didnt elect Obama for the FAR LEFT policies he is exhibiting, they elected him for CHANGE and because he campaigned as a moderate, which we all knew was a lie.

Obama has said repeatedly that this is just the first step. He WANTS a single payer system but he knows he cant do it over night. This plan will bankrupt the insurance companies and then the GOVT will take them over. Why do you think they stopped pushing for the Public Option? Because Obama said "hey guys, we dont need a public option, this bill will give us control of the insurance companies, we will BECOME the public option through ownership. " hes absolutely right.

[Total_Blender]

beat me to it. Not to mention you can't even make an Obama joke around this clown. He gets offended and starts defending him. SO WHAT IF HE THROWS LIKE A GIRL, HE CAN STILL PRESIDENTMORE BETTAR THENBUSH EVAR CAN. lolololool.

If you want to make a joke about him, make one thats actually funny. Then I might laugh. :goodjob:

Anyway, I think that when it comes to society its all of us or none. The society that doesn't look after its own ends up being a shitty place to live. You can have your material manifestations of success like cars, jewlery, etc if thats whats important to you. Most hardcore right-wingers I've met are selfish pricks who only care about what's theirs or how they can get more.

[Vteckidd]

If you want to make a joke about him, make one thats actually funny. Then I might laugh. :goodjob:

Anyway, I think that when it comes to society its all of us or none. The society that doesn't look after its own ends up being a shitty place to live. You can have your material manifestations of success like cars, jewlery, etc if thats whats important to you. Most hardcore right-wingers I've met are selfish pricks who only care about what's theirs or how they can get more.

You cant possibly believe that.

Im not a hardcore right winger at all. I believe in Pro Choice so there goes that argument. I believe in legalizing marijuana so there goes that argument.

The problem with your way of thinking, IMO, is you dont know when to stop. Saying

I think that when it comes to society its all of us or none. The society that doesn't look after its own ends up being a shitty place to live

Is such an ambiguous statement. All or None? Are you serious? How is that any different that what i posted before?

Society should CHOOSE to look after others on its own, not by legislating people to "care". You guys are about telling people what to do, i choose to let people do it on their own. How did we not take care of our own before? I mean you realize the immense social programs we have already right?

Its not my responsibility to take care of Shaqueesha and her 4 illegitimate children. Just like its not your responsibility to take care of Darrel and his trailer park wife who live on welfare. Since when did we start trying to take care of people who dont want to take care of themselves?

Sure there are those less fortunate who do need help, and for the most part, society helps out. Bill Gates does great work for children and education. No one MADE Batlground do a Toys For Tots Dyno day. I never knew Leisa (Bretts wife) and i donated a $200 Wii to his raffle, no one made me do it.

Its 2 fundamental sections of thinking.

I believe in personal responsibility with limited government. If you want it, DO IT. I do not believe in this day an age if you want something you cant achieve it.

You believe that the govt should take care of everyone and coddle them because they are too weak to achieve it on their own. You believe that the Govt should legislate we all care for the less fortunate. You believe that everyone "deserves" success rather than only the few that worked hard to get it.

Ive said this a million times, the world needs ditch diggers , the world needs failures. The world needs people that make bad decisions and have 3 kids and never make it ahead in life. thats what seperates the WINNERS from the LOSERS or NOT SO WINNERS.

If you start rewarding failure or trying to bring down the people that truly standout above the crowd, you are making everyone mediocre. When you do that, America is no longer great

[xxbckiexx]

If you want to make a joke about him, make one thats actually funny. Then I might laugh. :goodjob:

Anyway, I think that when it comes to society its all of us or none. The society that doesn't look after its own ends up being a shitty place to live. You can have your material manifestations of success like cars, jewlery, etc if thats whats important to you. Most hardcore right-wingers I've met are selfish pricks who only care about what's theirs or how they can get more.

everyone BUT YOU laughed at that. Maybe you're a girly man yourself. Like most liberal douches, you don't find someones lack of manliness (things men do, you know, like hunting, sports, being MEN) funny. I'm all about helping my fellow american, but not helping the fellow American who won't help themselves. There's a difference. Again, you can't have world peace and make EVERYONE happy. Stop being such a sap.

[Gorilla Eg!]

I am totally against this and it wasnt THE best decision or solution to our economic situation, but like its been said before....."you cant fight city hall!"

[Bajjani]

You regurgitate that crap so well that when I read your posts its like I'm actually watching Glenn Beck. Maybe you could add some bitchin' American flag graphics, and some scrolling talking points to your signature to complete the effect.



WTF man, Mass. is a state. States don't have mayors, they have Governor's, legislators, and attorneys general.

Also, it seems the Sonny has appointed a "Special Atorney General" to file suit against the Gov't because Thurbert Baker won't do it.

Sonny says he has a team of attorneys who will work for free, but I am sure this will end up costing the state a shitload of money with no real results. For one thing, an attorney's time is never free. These guys are getting something form Sonny, probably either political patronage appointments or financial backing and endorsements to run for public office. Secondly, it will cost us the salary that will be paid to the "Special Attorney General." There are also court costs, and the time and resources that will be spent on this that could be diverted to other things like the HUGE ASS HOLE IN THE BUDGET.

The GOP's mantra is that there are "no free lunches," so does Sonny really think he can pull a fast one on us and act like this isn't going to cost anything? It seems like all he's trying to do lately is just save whatever political capital he's got left with the Teabagging set.


My bad, wasn't 100% there today like I said I've been sick..

I fixed your name for you (it was purely because you can't seem to click quote and not change my name, so I changed yours, not because of your views)

[Frög]

LOL

1. IA is not the place I want to discuss politics.. The average IQ is lower here than anywhere I can think of.
2. We are in GA, so I doubt my political POV will align with most hicks here.
3. Fox news? Really? Talk about using a bias source.

[JITB]

LOL

1. IA is not the place I want to discuss politics.. The average IQ is lower here than anywhere I can think of.
2. We are in GA, so I doubt my political POV will align with most hicks here.
3. Fox news? Really? Talk about using a bias source.



i know right the Us doesnt care what georgia thinks...lol as far as they know we still have dirt roads everywhere!

[Crazy Asian]

i know right the Us doesnt care what georgia thinks...lol as far as they know we still have dirt roads everywhere!

Wrong. Roads with holes everywhere.

[Total_Blender]

You cant possibly believe that.

Im not a hardcore right winger at all. I believe in Pro Choice so there goes that argument. I believe in legalizing marijuana so there goes that argument.

The problem with your way of thinking, IMO, is you dont know when to stop. Saying

You presented a one-sided explanation of my point of view, I presented a one-sided explanation of yours. There you go.

Bagjanji, fuck off ya worthless snot. I can call you whatever I want because you posted this in the Whoreslounge instead of politics. So... go suck a camel's dick.

[Bajjani]

You presented a one-sided explanation of my point of view, I presented a one-sided explanation of yours. There you go.

Bagjanji, fuck off ya worthless snot. I can call you whatever I want because you posted this in the Whoreslounge instead of politics. So... go suck a camel's dick.

Sure, you can look retarded because you can't spell a 7 letter name thats posted 5 posts above yours on the same screen, but I'm going to call you whatever I want as well because you're a worthless cock sucking faggot, like I said above.

[David88vert]

Wrong. Roads with holes everywhere.

We have steel plates for those holes.....

[Total_Blender]

Sure, you can look retarded because you can't spell a 7 letter name thats posted 5 posts above yours on the same screen:blah:.

Your momma should have swallowed you when she had the chance. Anyway, keep running your cocksucker, it makes no difference to me. :goodjob:

[Vteckidd]

You presented a one-sided explanation of my point of view, I presented a one-sided explanation of yours. There you go.

you dont get off that easy. You cant make an ambiguous statement like that and then say i was wrong. What do you believe then?

Youve said/posted/inferred NUMEROUS times that you agree with the hardcore lefts agenda, which is progressive, which is Nancy Pelosi, Obama, Emmanuel, etc. You believe in spreading the wealth, making everyone equal, its societys duty to take care of the less fortunate EVEN if the less fortunate dont help themselves.

How many of these statements do you believe in:
• You think health care is a basic human right, and that single-payer national health insurance is a worthwhile reform on our way toward creating a non-profit national health care service.

• You think that human rights ought always to trump property rights.

• You think U.S. military spending is an obscene waste of resources, and that the only freedom this spending protects is the freedom of economic elites to exploit working people all around the planet.

• You think U.S. troops should be brought home not only from Afghanistan and Iraq, but from all 130 countries in which the U.S. has military bases.

• You think political leaders who engage in "preemptive war" and invasions should be brought to trial for crimes against humanity and judged against the standards of international law established at Nuremberg after World War Two.

• You think public education should be free, not just from kindergarten through high school, but as far as a person is willing and able to go.

• You think that electoral reform should include instant run-off voting, publicly-financed elections, easy ballot access for all parties, and proportional representation.

• You think that electoral democracy is not enough, and that democracy must also be participatory and extend to workplaces.

• You think that strengthening the rights of all workers to unionize and bargain collectively is a useful step toward full economic democracy.

• You think that as a society we have a collective obligation to provide everyone who is willing and able to work with a job that pays a living wage and offers dignity.

• You think that a class system which forces some people to do dirty, dangerous, boring work all the time, while others get to do clean, safe, interesting work all the time, can never deliver social justice.

• You think that regulating big corporations isn't enough, and that such corporations, if they are allowed to exist at all, must either serve the common good or be put into public receivership.

• You think that the legal doctrine granting corporations the same constitutional rights as natural persons is absurd and must be overturned.

• You think it's wrong to allow individuals to accumulate wealth without limits, and that the highest incomes should be capped well before they begin to threaten community and democracy.

• You think that wealth, not just income, should be taxed.

• You think it's crazy to use the Old Testament as a policy guide for the 21st century.

• You believe in celebrating diversity, while also recognizing that having women and people of color proportionately represented among the class of oppressors is not the goal we should be aiming for.

• You think that the state has no right to kill, and that putting people to death to show that killing is wrong will always be a self-defeating policy.

• You think that anyone who desires the reins of power that come with high political office should, by reason of that desire, be seen as unfit for the job.

• You think that instead of more leaders, we need fewer followers.

• You think that national borders, while sometimes establishing territories of safety, more often establish territories of exploitation, much like gang turf.

• You are open to considering how the privileges you enjoy because of race, class, gender, sexual orientation, and/or physical ability might come at the expense of others.

• You believe that voting every few years is a weak form of political participation, and that achieving social justice requires concerted effort before, during, and after elections.

• You think that, ideally, no one would have more wealth more than they need until everyone has at least as much as they need to live a safe, happy, decent life.

• You recognize that an economic system which requires continuous expansion, destroys the environment, relies on rapidly-depleting fossil fuels, exacerbates inequality, and leads to war after war is unsustainable and must be replaced. Score a bonus point if you understand that sticking to the existing system is what's unrealistic.

I can already pick out 5 you will agree with

[Vteckidd]

guys keep the name calling out of here it really accomplishes nothing

[preferredduck]

progressives dont believe that, they believe that people who are worse off than "that guy" are like that because the system is unfair. Its their job to "spread the wealth around" or dictate what is right to you. I mean look at all the examples

Van Jones
Biden saying "we are going to run the insurance companies"
Takeover of GM
Healthcare
Cap N Trade

These are all heavily progressive/communist policies or agendas or agents. Blender is the minority most people didnt elect Obama for the FAR LEFT policies he is exhibiting, they elected him for CHANGE and because he campaigned as a moderate, which we all knew was a lie.

Obama has said repeatedly that this is just the first step. He WANTS a single payer system but he knows he cant do it over night. This plan will bankrupt the insurance companies and then the GOVT will take them over. Why do you think they stopped pushing for the Public Option? Because Obama said "hey guys, we dont need a public option, this bill will give us control of the insurance companies, we will BECOME the public option through ownership. " hes absolutely right.

obama is becoming more of a dictator i have noticed. soon they will censor the internet.

[Bajjani]

Your momma should have swallowed you when she had the chance. Anyway, keep running your cocksucker, it makes no difference to me. :goodjob:

If it makes no difference, don't say shit. Do me a favor go bust your ass and make a few million and start paying for these lazy fucks that want free healthcare, welfare money, and food stamps so I don't have to.

[preferredduck]

LOL

1. IA is not the place I want to discuss politics.. The average IQ is lower here than anywhere I can think of.
2. We are in GA, so I doubt my political POV will align with most hicks here.
3. Fox news? Really? Talk about using a bias source.

lay it out there my friend i can handle the truth!!! whoever cannot we will see no online activity as their fuzzy little heads will explode, to the other poster the rest of the country thinks we have not changed here in 100 years or so.

[preferredduck]

Your momma should have swallowed you when she had the chance. Anyway, keep running your cocksucker, it makes no difference to me. :goodjob:

wow i think a potato might have a higher IQ, atleast a potato can make electricity unlike total mater. i really am thinking you probably are not even old enough to drive let alone think on your own!!!