canndo
Well-Known Member
there you have it, a movie for those who already believe what is in the movie. Spoon feed the haters with what they already enjoy eating.
2016 The Movie
- Thread starter beenthere
- Start date
there you have it, a movie for those who already believe what is in the movie. Spoon feed the haters with what they already enjoy eating.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Not like the Democratic party isnt serving heaping spoonfulls of shit every day in the media. (RYAN WANTS TO KILL MEDICARE) ( ROMNEY KILLED A WOMAN WHO'S HUSBAND WORKED AT BAIN) (ROMNEY MIGHT BE A FELON)... Yeah, feed the haters with what they already enjoy eating.
Have a nice big slice of Hypocrite pie with your lunch today...
nontheist
Well-Known Member
Yeah they the Medicare BS is old, Obamacare takes more money out of medicare than the Ryan plan did its sad the elderly getting raped and don't even know it. CBO has already said we're heading for another recession so get ready and Obama better start coming up with a plan or its going to get ugly.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Ahem... Ryan DOES want to kill medicare. Simple as that. Their dancing around it with "we won't do anything to you old folks (so you can safely vote for us) but we will voucherize the thing for your children. That is "killing medicare"
No one said Romney killed a woman - that was your fake righteously indignant rightist talking heads that said that.
Romney might be a felon? could be, you never know, unless of course you could see his tax returns. There is a big raft of difference between the half truths the Dems produce and the outright lies the Repubs produce. I have no idea what is in this movie, but I can surmise from the post I responded to that it doesn't put Obama in a very good light.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Nonthiest - take a good look at the myth debunking sites or any non-partisan site and they will all tell you that Obama's 716 does not come out of senior pockets nor does it reduce their care. Note also that Ryan intends to remove about the same amount of money, but that money DOES come out of seniors wallets.
nontheist
Well-Known Member
Maybe you need to look into the subject more closely, most republican support comes from the elderly why are on earth would they attack/alienate them? More left BS that Ryan is trying to kill medicare when in fact he has strait forward answer to fix a system on the verge of bankruptcy and not shove a "government program" down seniors throats.
chrishydro
Well-Known Member
Could not disagree more, when the dems lose this nov she will be out of a job, out of sight out of mind. The Clintons will finialy be gone gone gone. ugh
canndo
Well-Known Member
I have looked my friend. Repubs are claiming (rightly) that the elderly will not be touched by the Republican plan, and only their children will be affected. As far as drawing funds from Medicare, we know that this ticket has a penchant for outright lies, this is not an outright lie but an attempt to obscure.
It is particularly difficult to show you an explaination of Ryan's plans without using what you would call biased sources, and when I look for right biased sources, they do not go into the particulars (which should tell you something).
Any examination of his plan involves his offering vouchers that are equal to the next to the lowest cost for health insurance. Those in this "voucher generation" will get money, and those payments will be adjusted for inflation, but not for medical inflation which is between 6 and 9 percent if I recall. It is highly unlikely that the "next to the lowest cost" plan will be as comprehensive as medicare is now. And there will be a continuingly larger gap between the size of the voucher and the amount insurance costs - leaving the difference to the seniors. Ryan claims that this will spur competition and lower the costs but he has absolutely no evidence to back that up. He also claims that seniors could still opt for Medicare but a defunded medicare will hardly be able to support them as seniors one by one find that they can no longer afford their voucher system and return to the only health care option they have left.
But I will try to find something more concrete for you.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Robbed 716 billion from medicare? - mostly false
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/15/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-said-barack-obama-first-history-rob-me/
Ryan's plan takes $700 from medicare? - true
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/15/stephanie-cutter/ryans-plan-includes-700-billion-medicare-cuts-says/
Politifact claims however that Ryan's plan will not "destroy" medicare. This is their conjecture and cannot be a statement of fact, I believe it will destroy medicare, and of course the defintion is different. vouchers are not "medicare as we know it".
nontheist
Well-Known Member
You do realize that when you say "he has absolutely no evidence to back that up" that's the basis for Obamacare on a whole? Flood the market and lower prices. Competition, competition, competition....
"He also claims that seniors could still opt for Medicare but a defunded medicare will hardly be able to support them as seniors one by one find that they can no longer afford their voucher system and return to the only health care option they have left."
This is purely speculation you or the lefties have no way of knowing this, they're making shit up and hoping it sticks. No where is Ryan trying to dismantle medicare.
Ryan says that Medicare won't be affected for those who are 55 and older. I'm 54, been paying in for 40 years now, am I supposed to feel better? Why would current beneficiaries think they should get more benefits while paying less? Ryan also hasn't said how he will fund Medicare once it runs out of money, in 2016 if Obama's "cuts" are repealed and reports are correct. He also doesn't mention that Medicaid will be severely slashed. Do senior citizens know that Medicaid pays for skilled and long-term nursing care, not Medicare? Probably not. Children are the other large group covered under Medicaid. In most states, adults must be disabled to qualify for Medicaid unless they are on Medicare.
Neither candidate has a sustainable approach to Medicare or health care in general. We need to cut the costs of care, not shift who pays the bill or make minor tweaks. We have by far the most expensive health care system in the world, spend an average of $8000/citizen, despite having 50 million people with no coverage. Other developed nations spend half or less and are ranked higher than 37th in terms of outcomes. I WISH Obama was a socialist or communist, at least when it came to health care. Hardly. Eisenhower spent far more on stimulus money after WWII than Obama could ever dream of, between the GI bill and infrastructure, and our debt was higher than now as percentage of GDP. We also had top marginal tax rates of 91%. Was Eisenhower a socialist? A socialist wouldn't have bailed out the banks, they would have nationalized them, a la Sweden in the early 90's. A socialist also would not have allowed government employment rates to dramatically fall, esp. during a recession. Do you realize that socialists, by definition, believe in government control of industry? A communist believes everybody should receive the same compensation. Wealth inequality has increased since 2009. And how has austerity measures (cutting government spending) worked out in Europe? In case you don't know, they all are seeing their deficits increase, which economically only makes sense. You can't cut national spending without contracting GDP (and thus revenues) and have high unemployment without increasing entitlement expenses. We have one of the highest rates of poverty in the developed world, second or third to last (which is responsible for our lousy student test scores, our non-inner city schools test quite competitively with other countries). I don't like Obama and his crony capitalism or Romney's either (oil subsidies for the corporations that are the most profitable in the world and whose executives testified when subsidies were first instituted, back in 2006(?) when the price of oil fell precipitously, that the subsidies wouldn't be needed once oil reached $55/barrel, anybody remember when that last was?) and will vote third party, but the math doesn't even work on Romney's budget and he refuses to clarify how he will balance the budget while cutting taxes by 20%, eliminating capital gains and dividends tax, not touching Medicare for current recipients, and increasing defense spending. There aren't enough tax deductions to eliminate. Obama a socialist, or communist....... that's almost funny.
P.S. I won't believe Republicans care about the life of unborn children until they start to care about their lives once they are born. Or are they concerned about the money spent on women claiming rape so they can get federal money to pay for their abortions, like all 28 of the women who had federally funded abortions last year as a result of rape claims. You know how women are. We all think the easiest way to make a profit is off having babies. Of course, they don't want to pay for birth control, only aspirin between the knees...... but on the other hand, they make sure that their Viagra is covered.
Neither candidate has a sustainable approach to Medicare or health care in general. We need to cut the costs of care, not shift who pays the bill or make minor tweaks. We have by far the most expensive health care system in the world, spend an average of $8000/citizen, despite having 50 million people with no coverage. Other developed nations spend half or less and are ranked higher than 37th in terms of outcomes. I WISH Obama was a socialist or communist, at least when it came to health care. Hardly. Eisenhower spent far more on stimulus money after WWII than Obama could ever dream of, between the GI bill and infrastructure, and our debt was higher than now as percentage of GDP. We also had top marginal tax rates of 91%. Was Eisenhower a socialist? A socialist wouldn't have bailed out the banks, they would have nationalized them, a la Sweden in the early 90's. A socialist also would not have allowed government employment rates to dramatically fall, esp. during a recession. Do you realize that socialists, by definition, believe in government control of industry? A communist believes everybody should receive the same compensation. Wealth inequality has increased since 2009. And how has austerity measures (cutting government spending) worked out in Europe? In case you don't know, they all are seeing their deficits increase, which economically only makes sense. You can't cut national spending without contracting GDP (and thus revenues) and have high unemployment without increasing entitlement expenses. We have one of the highest rates of poverty in the developed world, second or third to last (which is responsible for our lousy student test scores, our non-inner city schools test quite competitively with other countries). I don't like Obama and his crony capitalism or Romney's either (oil subsidies for the corporations that are the most profitable in the world and whose executives testified when subsidies were first instituted, back in 2006(?) when the price of oil fell precipitously, that the subsidies wouldn't be needed once oil reached $55/barrel, anybody remember when that last was?) and will vote third party, but the math doesn't even work on Romney's budget and he refuses to clarify how he will balance the budget while cutting taxes by 20%, eliminating capital gains and dividends tax, not touching Medicare for current recipients, and increasing defense spending. There aren't enough tax deductions to eliminate. Obama a socialist, or communist....... that's almost funny.
P.S. I won't believe Republicans care about the life of unborn children until they start to care about their lives once they are born. Or are they concerned about the money spent on women claiming rape so they can get federal money to pay for their abortions, like all 28 of the women who had federally funded abortions last year as a result of rape claims. You know how women are. We all think the easiest way to make a profit is off having babies. Of course, they don't want to pay for birth control, only aspirin between the knees...... but on the other hand, they make sure that their Viagra is covered.
canndo
Well-Known Member
I don't believe it is Nonthiest - I will have to see something about that - but it brings up a point. If the afordable care act was intended to flood the market and promote competition then it is neither a government run health care "scheme" nor a socialist take over now is it.
Now how could a defunded medicare serve folks the same way a funded one does Nontheiest? Now, indeed it is speculation, how could it be otherwise, as it may or may not be in the future.
If I have only speculation, then so too does Ryan. The difference is that his speculation if inaccurate will cost us the insitution of medicare. Seems he may be the one who is throwing ideas up and hoping it sticks. Vouchers are not medicare, vouchers are something different.
canndo
Well-Known Member
A few things. You mention long term nursing and children but you forget that the disabled are cut adrift with a plan that cuts medicaid.
"eisenhower spent more money on stiumlus..." I do not believe that is correct, Obama's stimulus package is the larges in adjusted dollars of any like program, I believe it is the single costliest legislation in our history. I am reading "the new new deal" and it is revealing how broad this bill is. what I am coming to see is that it is a true revitalization of our entire country, something that Obama promised. IT seems that is often the case, the media has given it a bad name while not investigating it at all.
If you are interested check out Recovery.gov.
bedspirit
Active Member
Careful there man, telling it like it is isn't real popular on this site.
Seriously, though this is a great post.
The $716 billion comes from reduced payments to providers. Private insurers have negotiated some rates with providers that are at lower levels than Medicare. Interesting piece of trivia: Medicare funds 96% of the subsidies (wages) paid to physicians during internship/residency. Until last year when physician training programs managed to acquire 4% outside funding, Medicare picked up 100%. Lack of more residency slots is the largest bottleneck in our physician education program (limits our supply of doctors).
desert dude
Well-Known Member
If the movie is going to have that horrible music drowning out the dialogue, then I will have to pass. How could a competent sound engineer put out a trailer where you can only hear every third word of the narrator?
canndo
Well-Known Member
See how that little truth works when spread under the noses of some of the more conservative here.
newatit2010
Well-Known Member
Oh you forgot I was a racist and a bigot. At least I am not a American hater like a lot of you. God Bless America
What if the movie only told the truth from irrefutable facts, are you afraid of knowing the truth?
canndo
Well-Known Member
No one at this keyboard called you a racist or a bigot. Strange that you would opt to claim that because I am not like you, because I don't believe as you do, I must hate America - even though the concept of America has something to do with varied opinions.
do you wish for God to bless America to the exclusion of everyone else?