1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Two Years On: Obamacare

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Zeke12, Mar 23, 2012.

  1. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    If anyone thinks Michelle Obama has any influence over public policy in San Francisco, they are kidding themselves.
     
  2. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    When lefties try to limit freedom, the consequences are always negative.
     
  3. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    I'll use a saying that righties use whenever I point out how companies screw over workers or banks screw over their customers: People always have the freedom to move to another country.
     
  4. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    But since I'm for more freedom, why would I move to countries with less freedom? The left, on the other hand, is for more government and less freedom. There are numerous such countries they could move to rather than ruin this one.
     
  5. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    And, let's review again how what Dems told us would be less than a trillion dollars will actually be more than $2 trillion while taking billions and billions out of Medicare.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/cbo-obamacare-would-cost-over-2-trillion
     
  6. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    So you're saying that America is the most free country in the world? Good.

    Which means that, in spite of the shrieking about big bad government by the right, there still isn't another country around that can touch us in terms of freedom. And I'd think that the country is considerably better off now with this pesky government interference.

    Righties have said the same thing about government getting too involved in for the last 200 years. They said that about child labor, poor food handling, worker's rights and so on.

    It was all, "How dare the government interfere in my freedom to pay a 6-year-old to work 14 hours a day for 5 cents an hour and then feed him gruel that he must pay with company scrip!"
     
  7. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Well at least gruel is an upgrade from rotten rice.

    Maybe the indentured child serfs unionized.
     
  8. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Meanwhile, we'll be saving a trillion or so by not sending our troops into a certain Mideast adventure.
     
  9. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    Nothing more entertainin than watching someone brag about how a country is great because of freedom while they work to make it less free.
     
  10. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    Not at all.

    I believe in limited government in the classic, *liberal* sense of the word.

    There are areas the government simply cannot cross into. There are other areas where the government is free to insert itself, and should on many occasions.

    Forcing people to patronize private companies should fall into the former. If our Constitution doesn't protect us from that, then it's poorly written.
     
  11. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    No, but you should examine the consequences carefully, and not just cheer wildly and thoughtlessly for the intended result.

    Good and intended:
    Health insurance for everyone

    Bad and unintended:
    Wildly inflating costs for large swaths of the middle class
    Handing the government unprecedented power to force the patronage of private companies on all citizens.
    Entrenchment of the private insurance paradigm in America's national health system.
     
  12. Zeke12

    Zeke12 Guest

    Is your car insured?

    Do you pay FICA?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page