(10-21-2015 11:38 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  No because the changes are incremental and not total. Which means it gives states time to adjust to the changes. What did you want the Feds to foot the bill forever?

um... yes.

It's their plan, why SHOULDN'T they bear the cost of it?

That's why I've repeatedly suggested that they could have solved all of these 'problems' with state non-compliance by simply expanding medicare.

Why is it the state's responsibility to implement the priorities of the feds?

I mean, if you're okay with states opting out, then fine....

but since you posted this thread touting the obviously misleading and wholly temporary 'advantages' of not opting out, obviously you aren't.

So you'd be okay with me voting to take your taxes to 70% as long as I did it gradually? I mean, where do you think this money is going to come from? I don't know what state you're in, but if it's a small or relatively poor one, or one with a high percentage of illegals, you're (potentially) up a creek.

(10-21-2015 11:47 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:43 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:38 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:36 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:33 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  This is excellent news.

Because it could lead to higher state taxes in each state that expanded? Thus further affecting the middle class and destroying the little infrastructure we have left?

No because the changes are incremental and not total. Which means it gives states time to adjust to the changes. What did you want the Feds to foot the bill forever?

No, I'd prefer the federal government leave state government alone and let them do their own thing without threats or what they call "incentives". ACA will and has been destroying the middle class with much higher priced premiums and the rest, all of this is an attack on a weak middle class, we needed to focus on strengthening the economy first before we made healthcare moves like this.

If the feds left states to their own thing, we'd still have segregation in the South.

Great comparison. Definitely relevant to the ObamaCare debate.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

(10-21-2015 11:47 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Bingo.

The middle-class, especially the relatively young and healthy, are the ones taking the brunt of the negative effects of ObamaCare.

They(we) are paying ridiculous premiums to help pay for old folks and the perpetual underclass.

I pay $800/month for a family of three. I'm middle-middle class.

we're the same age.....you had to know basically from birth we were going to get screwed over by the large numbers of the boomer generation....

you, me, the rest......we're screwed.....this sinkhole can't be fixed....we're getting hit on both sides of the population numbers now....

welcome to hell on earth pal.....

(10-21-2015 11:57 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:47 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Bingo.

The middle-class, especially the relatively young and healthy, are the ones taking the brunt of the negative effects of ObamaCare.

They(we) are paying ridiculous premiums to help pay for old folks and the perpetual underclass.

I pay $800/month for a family of three. I'm middle-middle class.

we're the same age.....you had to know basically from birth we were going to get screwed over by the large numbers of the boomer generation....

you, me, the rest......we're screwed.....this sinkhole can't be fixed....we're getting hit on both sides of the population numbers now....

welcome to hell on earth pal.....

Isn't it great that both SS and the 401(k) system are going to *****? Yayyyyyy.

hahaha, the liberals are still falling for the dangling carrot on the stick. Liberals cant pass up free money now, even though their state will have to bend over and take it later.

Meanwhile, states that expanded medicaid are already seeing their budgets getting busted in 2017. They see the doom coming. Vaseline anyone?

(10-21-2015 11:49 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:47 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:43 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:38 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:36 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  Because it could lead to higher state taxes in each state that expanded? Thus further affecting the middle class and destroying the little infrastructure we have left?

No because the changes are incremental and not total. Which means it gives states time to adjust to the changes. What did you want the Feds to foot the bill forever?

No, I'd prefer the federal government leave state government alone and let them do their own thing without threats or what they call "incentives". ACA will and has been destroying the middle class with much higher priced premiums and the rest, all of this is an attack on a weak middle class, we needed to focus on strengthening the economy first before we made healthcare moves like this.

If the feds left states to their own thing, we'd still have segregation in the South.

Great comparison. Definitely relevant to the ObamaCare debate.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

fit's phallacy....

(10-21-2015 12:00 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  hahaha, the liberals are still falling for the dangling carrot on the stick. Liberals cant pass up free money now, even though their state will have to bend over and take it later.

Meanwhile, states that expanded medicaid are already seeing their budgets getting busted in 2017. They see the doom coming. Vaseline anyone?

I've never understood why people enjoy using that sort of imagery to describe certain events.

(10-21-2015 11:59 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:57 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:47 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Bingo.

The middle-class, especially the relatively young and healthy, are the ones taking the brunt of the negative effects of ObamaCare.

They(we) are paying ridiculous premiums to help pay for old folks and the perpetual underclass.

I pay $800/month for a family of three. I'm middle-middle class.

we're the same age.....you had to know basically from birth we were going to get screwed over by the large numbers of the boomer generation....

you, me, the rest......we're screwed.....this sinkhole can't be fixed....we're getting hit on both sides of the population numbers now....

welcome to hell on earth pal.....

Isn't it great that both SS and the 401(k) system are going to *****? Yayyyyyy.

it's next on the pecking order....I'm more curious how they are going to tango with the Roth.....

(10-21-2015 11:49 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:47 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:43 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:38 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:36 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  Because it could lead to higher state taxes in each state that expanded? Thus further affecting the middle class and destroying the little infrastructure we have left?

No because the changes are incremental and not total. Which means it gives states time to adjust to the changes. What did you want the Feds to foot the bill forever?

No, I'd prefer the federal government leave state government alone and let them do their own thing without threats or what they call "incentives". ACA will and has been destroying the middle class with much higher priced premiums and the rest, all of this is an attack on a weak middle class, we needed to focus on strengthening the economy first before we made healthcare moves like this.

If the feds left states to their own thing, we'd still have segregation in the South.

Great comparison. Definitely relevant to the ObamaCare debate.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

Actually it's spot on. States cannot be allowed to drag their feet when it comes to providing for their citizens. The feds have to keep pressure on the states to do these things.

(10-21-2015 12:02 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:59 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:57 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:47 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Bingo.

The middle-class, especially the relatively young and healthy, are the ones taking the brunt of the negative effects of ObamaCare.

They(we) are paying ridiculous premiums to help pay for old folks and the perpetual underclass.

I pay $800/month for a family of three. I'm middle-middle class.

we're the same age.....you had to know basically from birth we were going to get screwed over by the large numbers of the boomer generation....

you, me, the rest......we're screwed.....this sinkhole can't be fixed....we're getting hit on both sides of the population numbers now....

welcome to hell on earth pal.....

Isn't it great that both SS and the 401(k) system are going to *****? Yayyyyyy.

it's next on the pecking order....I'm more curious how they are going to tango with the Roth.....

this is what it looks like when the government has control of your money and retirement.

(10-21-2015 12:08 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:49 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:47 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:43 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:38 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  No because the changes are incremental and not total. Which means it gives states time to adjust to the changes. What did you want the Feds to foot the bill forever?

No, I'd prefer the federal government leave state government alone and let them do their own thing without threats or what they call "incentives". ACA will and has been destroying the middle class with much higher priced premiums and the rest, all of this is an attack on a weak middle class, we needed to focus on strengthening the economy first before we made healthcare moves like this.

If the feds left states to their own thing, we'd still have segregation in the South.

Great comparison. Definitely relevant to the ObamaCare debate.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

Actually it's spot on. States cannot be allowed to drag their feet when it comes to providing for their citizens. The feds have to keep pressure on the states to do these things.

It is truly scary and also very sheepish how benevolent you believe the federal government to be.

You think the states are not "providing for their citizens" because they refuse to blow up the size and scope of medicaid? Like it isn't easy enough to qualify for already? Foh.

(10-21-2015 12:09 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:02 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:59 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:57 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:47 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Bingo.

The middle-class, especially the relatively young and healthy, are the ones taking the brunt of the negative effects of ObamaCare.

They(we) are paying ridiculous premiums to help pay for old folks and the perpetual underclass.

I pay $800/month for a family of three. I'm middle-middle class.

we're the same age.....you had to know basically from birth we were going to get screwed over by the large numbers of the boomer generation....

you, me, the rest......we're screwed.....this sinkhole can't be fixed....we're getting hit on both sides of the population numbers now....

welcome to hell on earth pal.....

Isn't it great that both SS and the 401(k) system are going to *****? Yayyyyyy.

it's next on the pecking order....I'm more curious how they are going to tango with the Roth.....

this is what it looks like when the government has control of your money and retirement.

cue recent Illinois' lottery winners......

(10-21-2015 12:10 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:08 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:49 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:47 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:43 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  No, I'd prefer the federal government leave state government alone and let them do their own thing without threats or what they call "incentives". ACA will and has been destroying the middle class with much higher priced premiums and the rest, all of this is an attack on a weak middle class, we needed to focus on strengthening the economy first before we made healthcare moves like this.

If the feds left states to their own thing, we'd still have segregation in the South.

Great comparison. Definitely relevant to the ObamaCare debate.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

Actually it's spot on. States cannot be allowed to drag their feet when it comes to providing for their citizens. The feds have to keep pressure on the states to do these things.

It is truly scary and also very sheepish how benevolent you believe the federal government to be.

You think the states are not "providing for their citizens" because they refuse to blow up the size and scope of medicaid? Like it isn't easy enough to qualify for already? Foh.

you left out how the poor states are going to overcome the necessary obstacles they already can't overcome....

fit has zero concept of money and how it works....he planted another garden yesterday just hoping it will sprout....in the meantime, he'll vote blue thru and true....

(10-21-2015 12:08 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:49 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:47 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:43 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:38 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  No because the changes are incremental and not total. Which means it gives states time to adjust to the changes. What did you want the Feds to foot the bill forever?

No, I'd prefer the federal government leave state government alone and let them do their own thing without threats or what they call "incentives". ACA will and has been destroying the middle class with much higher priced premiums and the rest, all of this is an attack on a weak middle class, we needed to focus on strengthening the economy first before we made healthcare moves like this.

If the feds left states to their own thing, we'd still have segregation in the South.

Great comparison. Definitely relevant to the ObamaCare debate.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

Actually it's spot on. States cannot be allowed to drag their feet when it comes to providing for their citizens. The feds have to keep pressure on the states to do these things.

Absolutely wrong and not how the government was intended to work.

(10-21-2015 12:10 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:08 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:49 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:47 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:43 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  No, I'd prefer the federal government leave state government alone and let them do their own thing without threats or what they call "incentives". ACA will and has been destroying the middle class with much higher priced premiums and the rest, all of this is an attack on a weak middle class, we needed to focus on strengthening the economy first before we made healthcare moves like this.

If the feds left states to their own thing, we'd still have segregation in the South.

Great comparison. Definitely relevant to the ObamaCare debate.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

Actually it's spot on. States cannot be allowed to drag their feet when it comes to providing for their citizens. The feds have to keep pressure on the states to do these things.

It is truly scary and also very sheepish how benevolent you believe the federal government to be.

You think the states are not "providing for their citizens" because they refuse to blow up the size and scope of medicaid? Like it isn't easy enough to qualify for already? Foh.

Our government is a government of the people so I trust that they will do the right thing for all people more than I trust a state to do the same because states bow more to the will of the majority or elite class of people.

(10-21-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:10 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:08 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:49 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:47 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  If the feds left states to their own thing, we'd still have segregation in the South.

Great comparison. Definitely relevant to the ObamaCare debate.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

Actually it's spot on. States cannot be allowed to drag their feet when it comes to providing for their citizens. The feds have to keep pressure on the states to do these things.

It is truly scary and also very sheepish how benevolent you believe the federal government to be.

You think the states are not "providing for their citizens" because they refuse to blow up the size and scope of medicaid? Like it isn't easy enough to qualify for already? Foh.

Our government is a government of the people so I trust that they will do the right thing for all people more than I trust a state to do the same because states bow more to the will of the majority or elite class of people.

Surely you're trolling. Stahp the madness.

(10-21-2015 12:16 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:10 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:08 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 11:49 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Great comparison. Definitely relevant to the ObamaCare debate.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

Actually it's spot on. States cannot be allowed to drag their feet when it comes to providing for their citizens. The feds have to keep pressure on the states to do these things.

It is truly scary and also very sheepish how benevolent you believe the federal government to be.

You think the states are not "providing for their citizens" because they refuse to blow up the size and scope of medicaid? Like it isn't easy enough to qualify for already? Foh.

Our government is a government of the people so I trust that they will do the right thing for all people more than I trust a state to do the same because states bow more to the will of the majority or elite class of people.

Surely you're trolling. Stahp the madness.

Sadly he isn't.

(10-21-2015 12:18 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:16 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:10 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:08 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Actually it's spot on. States cannot be allowed to drag their feet when it comes to providing for their citizens. The feds have to keep pressure on the states to do these things.

It is truly scary and also very sheepish how benevolent you believe the federal government to be.

You think the states are not "providing for their citizens" because they refuse to blow up the size and scope of medicaid? Like it isn't easy enough to qualify for already? Foh.

Our government is a government of the people so I trust that they will do the right thing for all people more than I trust a state to do the same because states bow more to the will of the majority or elite class of people.

Surely you're trolling. Stahp the madness.

Sadly he isn't.

I'm not trolling. History has shown that the national government has done more for human rights than the states.

(10-21-2015 12:18 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:16 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:10 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:08 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Actually it's spot on. States cannot be allowed to drag their feet when it comes to providing for their citizens. The feds have to keep pressure on the states to do these things.

It is truly scary and also very sheepish how benevolent you believe the federal government to be.

You think the states are not "providing for their citizens" because they refuse to blow up the size and scope of medicaid? Like it isn't easy enough to qualify for already? Foh.

Our government is a government of the people so I trust that they will do the right thing for all people more than I trust a state to do the same because states bow more to the will of the majority or elite class of people.

Surely you're trolling. Stahp the madness.

Sadly he isn't.

you're right....it's his new modus operandi.....he's being serious as a troll can be

it is sad...

and he's legal.....

(10-21-2015 12:24 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:18 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:16 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 12:10 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  It is truly scary and also very sheepish how benevolent you believe the federal government to be.

You think the states are not "providing for their citizens" because they refuse to blow up the size and scope of medicaid? Like it isn't easy enough to qualify for already? Foh.

Our government is a government of the people so I trust that they will do the right thing for all people more than I trust a state to do the same because states bow more to the will of the majority or elite class of people.

Surely you're trolling. Stahp the madness.

Sadly he isn't.

I'm not trolling. History has shown that the national government has done more for human rights than the states.