Obama Care

Wow. Not only are you loopie you're also a flaming douche. Good combo.

I'm sure if you met me in real life you would think otherwise, and I'm sure I would do the same of you. Just keep in mind, you were the one who jumped in just to insult me.

The chart says that data provided through 2007 is from Bush's whitehouse.gov. Not sure if that is just for Bush's terms, but it implies it is everything from 1940 on. Not really a "republican bashing site". Also, saden has repeatedly referred to Obama as "weak-ass Obama". I get the feeling his man-crush is not as strong as you think.
Yea, but when he says that its because he thinks Obama should do more of this stuff.

For those of you with a lot of time, here's a very long (9 pages) article about the history of the healthcare system in America, and how it got so expensive and out of control. Actually, the last two pages are source references. If nothing else, add it to your Favorites and read it when you have time.

While the main premise is how government intervention, rules and regulations basically got us to where we are, doctors and hospitals don't escape criticism either. This was written back in 1993 -- the last time there was a big push for a national healthcare program.

Health care in the twentieth century: a history of government interference and protection | Business Economics | Find Articles at BNET (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1094/is_n2_v28/ai_13834930/)

If something has no application in "real" life, isn't that basically saying it's useless? Where else would it apply? Anyways, I don't really care if people think my accepted philosophy is useless. It's mine, not their's, and it represents a better way to live, IMO.

:food-smil

You seem to care an awful lot what other people think about your "accepted philosophy".

I don't think anyone thinks you or anything about you is worthless. But pointing out what they think is misguided is simply human. What the heck is the point of posting on a message board other than to expose your thoughts to the evaluation of others? Your "accepted philosophy" didn't originate out of thin air. You adopted it through evaluation of ideas presented to you through various media. Now you are spreading it in a similar way and expect for it not to be judged and evaluated?

Anyways back to health care. Overall this is the best PL thread in quite a while. I applaud almost everyone in it. Special kudos to Joe, CP and saden, and Sammy for some good back and forth.

Yeah, I've been a little touchy lately. Sorry for that.

However, you did criticize me, by saying that I am, "detached from reality," by assuming that I feel like I can convince people to think absent of ego. I am not trying to convince people of anything, and awakening cannot come from a convincing argument. So, your assumption led to the insult. See my response to SS33 for an explanation of why that response could be construed as insulting.

As for whether you're on track in understanding my point, yeah pretty much -- and I commend you for actually caring to try and understand me. Although, I'm not really thinking about the costs. I'm thinking in terms of principle (not reality, right?) -- we should look out for one another, and ensure that everyone has access to healthcare, among other things. Be our brothers' keepers, if you will.

If people identified less with their ego, they would not resist this so much, and they would be more concerned with finding ways to make it work -- rather than finding reasons to discredit it. I hear the same argument over and over: why should I help others? Why should I do for them, what they can't/won't do for themselves? Because it's better than neglecting them. That's all I'm saying.

"Blessed is he who considers the poor, The Lord will deliver him in time of trouble." -Psalm 41:1

BTW, I'm not a Christian, and I don't read the Bible. So, I don't want to misrepresent myself. I just know that most Americans are, and they can relate better to quotes from the Bible -- know what I mean?

OK I see. And by the way no criticism was intended, I'm just observing that this line of thinking has no practical application in our lives. And it never will. That's not a criticism, just an expression of my opinion.

Especially when it comes to our kids, we're genetically programmed to look out for ourselves to provide as much as we possibly can for them. I don't view myself as my brother's keeper, I view myself as my daughters' keeper. And consciously or unconsciously, I could never strip that away from myself.

Nice thought though, file it under the category of 'wouldn't it be nice.'

I'm sure if you met me in real life you would think otherwise, and I'm sure I would do the same of you. Just keep in mind, you were the one who jumped in just to insult me.

Exactly where did ANYONE insult you? Your reaction to someone not agreeing with you is that they are insulting you? I think you should heed some of the sentiments you yourself have already written because the only one here who is "assuming" what others are thinking is you.

I certainly hope you are right Saden, I will say your hyper-defensiveness of Obama is a little weird. I have clearly said I believe both parties are at fault for the debt. Probably the Republicans moreso because of their playing politics with it. I will give you that the chart you presented makes the debt seem oh so silly(nice link to a republican bashing site, oh so much more unbiased than Fox or BCBS), so again, I hope you are right. However, the substantial difference in the all time high debt at the beginning of the chart, and what we are currently experiencing, is that one was due to specific incidents, the war, the other is a systemic increase that cannot be reduced without painful cuts in infrastructure at some point. There is an article today about California's budget agreement, and the painful cuts to follow. I realize the difference is that California cannot print its own money and is much more tied to a "real" economy.


The difference is the data for links I provided is readily available and can be easily verified. If I were you I would try to catch saden in a lie and say "ahaaa, you're wrong saden because I looked (http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/SelectTable.asp?Popular=Y) at the GDP data (http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=5&ViewSeries=NO&Java=no&Request3Place=N&3Place=N&FromView=YES&Freq=Year&FirstYear=1929&LastYear=2008&3Place=N&Update=Update&JavaBox=no#Mid) and the national debt data (http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm) and your chart is totally wrong." Fox and BCBS make claims that I can't verify. If I don't have the methodology used I can't investigate further and if that's the case we enter the realm of opinions. Plus the whole thing is a clusterf*ck of self-referencing and quotation...they're all refering to the BCBSA study. It's doggy work and I f'ing loath doggy work.

If you dislike Obama as president you would totally hate me as president. Unfortunately, I'm not POTUS, sigh.

OK I see. And by the way no criticism was intended, I'm just observing that this line of thinking has no practical application in our lives. And it never will. That's not a criticism, just an expression of my opinion.

Especially when it comes to our kids, we're genetically programmed to look out for ourselves to provide as much as we possibly can for them. I don't view myself as my brother's keeper, I view myself as my daughters' keeper. And consciously or unconsciously, I could never strip that away from myself.

Nice thought though, file it under the category of 'wouldn't it be nice.'

My thought on self interest goes even deeper. No human does one single thing ever that doesn't provide benefit to them self. Nothing. It isn't possible for us to act in any different way. The main crux is that "benefit" is different from person to person. I, like you, would do anything to protect my kids. Why? Why do I care about some other human so much? Well I am responsible for existence(at least 50%) so I feel I am responsible to get them through life as safely and happily as possible, Why? Because I'd feel like a pure ass if I didn't. And there it is. I do it so I don't feel like an ass. That's an extremely simple explanation for a much more complicated situation but at it's base it is probably the reason that everyone who loves and cherishes their kids do so. It all comes back to the self. There is no other way.

If you dislike Obama as president you would totally hate me as president. Unfortunately, I'm not POTUS, sigh.

Actually I don't think I would so much. I would trust that you'd do everything in your power to implement your ideas...no compromise. Then we could at least see if the ideas work based on the results. And I think you'd abandon your ideas if they didn't work. One of the biggest problems in DC is that the ideas that eventually get passed and implemented are BS compromises that bastardize the philosophical premise they're based on. Thus, gaining any real judgment based on performance is nearly impossible because the implementation has become such a cluster. Absent a similar conservative candidate(in terms of basic approach/methodology) I'd probably vote for you. Sort of a "fine, time to prove it" vote.

It's called the Children's Health Insurance Program (aka, the "CHIP" program). And, unless I am mistaken, the reauthorization of the program did not extend coverage to children of illegal aliens.
CHIP | Children's Medicaid (http://www.chipmedicaid.org/english/qualify.asp)

Here is a clip of who can qualify:

The citizenship or immigration status of the parents does not affect the children's eligibility and is not reported on the application form.