If Health Law Is Overturned, What Will Liberals Do?

Mar 28, 2012 | Posted by: JCKS Editor | Full story: thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com

If the Supreme Court strikes down all or part of President Obama 's health care law , it will have unraveled a legislative compromise that many liberals had viewed with suspicion from the beginning.

In one of the ironies of recent politics, Mr. Obama was a late convert to the merits of the individual mandate that now appears to be in danger of being declared unconstitutional.

But the president’s embrace of the mandate — and his willingness to abandon a so-called public option to get a health care deal — was a hard pill to swallow for many of his Democratic supporters.

The Affordable Care Act promises to provide health insurance to millions who lacked it. But it also stops far short of the idea that health care is a basic right for everyone living in the country. And it embraces the market-based system of private health care delivery that has long existed in America.

Comments (Page 78)

Showing posts 1,541 - 1,560 of4,941
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Pamela

Citrus Heights, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1686
May 9, 2012
 
Governor John Kasich said it best. He said something on Neil Cavuto's show that defines all of the problems with SS, Medicare, state and local pensions. He said "we need entitlements for the 21st century, not for the middle of the 20th century." In other words when cities and states promised people pensions for the first time and people began to collect those pensions back in the 1950s, people lived to be 62. So a small pension could be paid to them based on the big baby boomer generation working and paying taxes to fund those pensions. Same thing with Social Security and Medicare. Back when the government began to pay out SS and Medicare in the middle of the last century, SS paid only $200 a month and the life expectancy was 62, so we could afford it. There was no expensive advanced health care so we could afford Medicare. What he is saying is today people live to be at least 80, so you can't promise people huge pensions because you have to pay them for 30 years, not for two years. And the cities and states letting people retire at 50-55 and they live to be at least 80, some to 100, there's NO way to pay for all of this. He's saying that you need tiny SS payments, tiny state and local pensions and much less Medicare to be able to pay these things out in 2012 when people live so long. You can't have the same standards you had in 1958 when your big huge working generation is retiring. There's no one to get the money from to pay the pensions and entitlements. At the same time you have millions from Mexico on welfare, having 5-10 kids on welfare and this is your younger generation that is supposed to pay for the 79 million baby boomers to get SS, Medicare, Medicaid and government pensions. So it's a financial impossibility. We need pensions that can be paid by an underclass on welfare, pensions that can be paid out over 30 or more years, not big pensions that are paid out over only 2-5 years. Adjustments in payments from all government monies have to be made for the 20 year additional life expectancy. He said it exactly like it is. this country has pension promises and entitlement promises based on a 1958 model, not on the current life expectancy.

When SS was created it paid out $200 a month to the few who lived to be 65 and they got $200 for maybe 2-5 years.

Today SS pays a man up to $2,600 a month for 30 or more years. Do the math. It pays out 20 or more times that it takes in per person.
Pamela

Citrus Heights, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1687
May 9, 2012
 
The Kangaroo wrote:
<quoted text>
The biggest "gimme program" ever and still existing was the defense buildup of the Cold War. Defense contractors make a killing selling us stuff we don't need. Anybody who whines about some poor family getting food stamps while supporting the abuses of the fat cats in the pentagon is dishonest or stupid or both.
that's true. All this country does is have wars, spend on the military. War corporations are our number one business in the U.S. And, we have these oil wars to get control of oil in Middle Eastern countries for Exxon and BP, not for us. Then Exxon and BP sell the oil to China. China, like the U.S. has no oil, so the rich Americans have their businesses in China, so they buy our politicans and invade countries for oil and then sell the oil to China to keep their businesses in China going. We pay for the wars, we get NOTHING out of it.

We have a larger military then the next ten largest military countries combined. Like Ron Paul says, we could blow up the whole world 20 times. Do we need to spend and spend so we have enough weapons to blow up the whole world 25 times?? And like he says, the Repubs spend more on wars than the Dems spend on welfare. End the welfare/warfare state. End both parties big spending. Ron Paul 2012.
Bythebay

Oakland, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1688
May 9, 2012
 
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
It still comes down to one thing, if you don't collect the tax then you can't spend what you don't have. Those Euros that are in the toilet right now are exactly the same, tax avoidance on a massive scale especially in Greece. As for the French well they are a little more complicated but hid a lot of their debt with fancy accounting. But what did the people do ? Elect socialist governments to fix it. I think that is desperation on their part as you can't keep educating Universty degree 20 somethings and put them straight on the welfare line with no chance of a job. Something is very wrong with that type of system. So the Euros may collapse then we are all in for a lot more pain and it won't make a scrap of difference who you elect or anyone else elects.
Euros? Euro(s) is a currency what you mean is Europeans or Europe?
The word Socialist or socialism is not a dirty word in Europe, or any other part of the world, it's only the American rightwing propaganda machinery that has managed to distort and corrupt a perfectly good word! Fact is, the US has just as many social programs, including giving huge sums of money to corporations, as most countries in Europe have or practice!
Pamela

Citrus Heights, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1689
May 9, 2012
 
Bythebay wrote:
<quoted text>
Euros? Euro(s) is a currency what you mean is Europeans or Europe?
The word Socialist or socialism is not a dirty word in Europe, or any other part of the world, it's only the American rightwing propaganda machinery that has managed to distort and corrupt a perfectly good word! Fact is, the US has just as many social programs, including giving huge sums of money to corporations, as most countries in Europe have or practice!
Social Security is socialism, that's why they call it "social" security. Medicare is government health care, it's socialism. Everyone wants those two things and they use up most of the budget, and, on the National Debt Clock it shows that Social Security and Medicare have 120 TRILLION dollars of unfunded liabilities. That means the government promised to pay out 120 trillion dollars more in those two socialist programs than people have paid in. Take about the biggest socialism on Earth, that is the U.S. It's social security and medicare. The same people who say they hate socialism are the ones who are fighting for them to get SS and Medicare. The tea party is only trying to keep SS and Medicare for themselves. That's why most of them are old folks. They are fighting to keep their socialism by saying "no socialism."

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1690
May 9, 2012
 
Pamela wrote:
<quoted text>Social Security is socialism, that's why they call it "social" security. Medicare is government health care, it's socialism. Everyone wants those two things and they use up most of the budget, and, on the National Debt Clock it shows that Social Security and Medicare have 120 TRILLION dollars of unfunded liabilities. That means the government promised to pay out 120 trillion dollars more in those two socialist programs than people have paid in. Take about the biggest socialism on Earth, that is the U.S. It's social security and medicare. The same people who say they hate socialism are the ones who are fighting for them to get SS and Medicare. The tea party is only trying to keep SS and Medicare for themselves. That's why most of them are old folks. They are fighting to keep their socialism by saying "no socialism."
Right, its Socialism and Tea Party people are Socialist too because Socialism believe's Society is first before the Individual and the sure are not Capitalist because dont need Social Security.

Lincoln was a Socialist and supporting Socialism in his state of the union speech on December 3, 1861 "Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration."

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/ab...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_movement

http://www.infoplease.com/t/hist/state-of-the...

“Dump Brownback ”

Since: Oct 10

Junction City KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1691
May 9, 2012
 
icu_ wrote:
<quoted text>The issue on this thread is the health care law. Please take your ad hominem rants somewhere else like some liberal rally where it will work on the dingenius liberals
Stick it, troll. Just because you're too stupid to understand nuances doesn't mean everybody else is.
harvey

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1692
May 9, 2012
 
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Where do we start? Medicare, Medicaid, school lunch program, HUD, Cash for Clunkers, Auto bailout, bank bailout, Fanny and Freddy bailout, all bureaucracies, food stamps, NPR, PBS, the arts, foreign aid, unemployment payments, social security, head start, college loans, commercial advertising government food stamps, stop smoking and seat belt laws, home energy assistance.
Here, take your pick of all expenditures that are not in the Constitution:
http://funding-programs.idilogic.aidpage.com/
Need more? Here you go:
http://dirtyspendingsecrets.com/
Another teaTHUGlican who'd have our economy in the toilet and riots in our streets.

Which he would then blame on 'socialist Democrats.'

Bleah!
harvey

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1693
May 9, 2012
 

Judged:

1

icu_ wrote:
<quoted text>The issue on this thread is the health care law. Please take your ad hominem rants somewhere else like some liberal rally where it will work on the dingenius liberals
Shut up, douchebag racist hypocrite. I've SEEN you stink up every Trayvon Martin thread on Topix with your foul racist rants and "jokes," so get stuffed.
frank

Oakland, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1694
May 9, 2012
 
JBH wrote:
The election is a lot about dispproving of much negativity of Obama , and what he has done badly , and is doing very badly , as Romney has the agenda which differs from Obama very much that Obama defies and wants to do against based on his dreadful views, stands and positions.
English is clearly not your first language is it? You post makes very little sense

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1695
May 9, 2012
 
Bythebay wrote:
<quoted text>
Euros? Euro(s) is a currency what you mean is Europeans or Europe?
The word Socialist or socialism is not a dirty word in Europe, or any other part of the world, it's only the American rightwing propaganda machinery that has managed to distort and corrupt a perfectly good word! Fact is, the US has just as many social programs, including giving huge sums of money to corporations, as most countries in Europe have or practice!
Yes "Euros" is English slang for Europeans as a collective. Also you are right about the "socialist" word misuse. Which basically is one of those only in America type of thing. The conservatives use it in every sentence as if it means something to fear. Like the old Red under the bed in the Mcarthy era. Economics in the 21st century has a whole new face. But the reality is whenever a country goes into downturn economically and the unemployment line gets longer by default so does the welfare line. The right of politics instead of working on the cause of those lines to become bigger they go straight for the line as being the cause. It's that type of insane thinking that never results in any sound solutions which need to be innovative. Like I have said in previous posts for a country to prosper they need both conservative thinkers and liberal thinkers. The conservatives build the factories the liberals make them run better. As history will show all the great innovative minds are basically liberal thinkers. Why because they can imagine outside a narrow set of guidelines. The Steve Jobs and Bill Gates of this world. Where as the conservatives see ways of building wealth that liberals mostly don't think about. Sometimes you get a mix of the two, as in Warren Buffet who can see things others can't see and turn it into profit. In a 21st century world, Governments need to have a tight grip on what the corporate world is doing otherwise it will gravitate to quicker profits as a primary motive rather than what is in the country's best interest.
frank

Oakland, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1696
May 9, 2012
 
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes "Euros" is English slang for Europeans as a collective. Also you are right about the "socialist" word misuse. Which basically is one of those only in America type of thing. The conservatives use it in every sentence as if it means something to fear. Like the old Red under the bed in the Mcarthy era. Economics in the 21st century has a whole new face. But the reality is whenever a country goes into downturn economically and the unemployment line gets longer by default so does the welfare line. The right of politics instead of working on the cause of those lines to become bigger they go straight for the line as being the cause. It's that type of insane thinking that never results in any sound solutions which need to be innovative. Like I have said in previous posts for a country to prosper they need both conservative thinkers and liberal thinkers. The conservatives build the factories the liberals make them run better. As history will show all the great innovative minds are basically liberal thinkers. Why because they can imagine outside a narrow set of guidelines. The Steve Jobs and Bill Gates of this world. Where as the conservatives see ways of building wealth that liberals mostly don't think about. Sometimes you get a mix of the two, as in Warren Buffet who can see things others can't see and turn it into profit. In a 21st century world, Governments need to have a tight grip on what the corporate world is doing otherwise it will gravitate to quicker profits as a primary motive rather than what is in the country's best interest.
Well said thank you ...

“Dump Brownback ”

Since: Oct 10

Junction City KS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1697
May 9, 2012
 
harvey wrote:
<quoted text>
Shut up, douchebag racist hypocrite. I've SEEN you stink up every Trayvon Martin thread on Topix with your foul racist rants and "jokes," so get stuffed.
I felt sorry for the poor ass, Harvey, because he couldn't even spell "dingus".

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1698
May 9, 2012
 
There is a huge amount of free-flowing anger and fear in the US. The fascists have simply found a way to channel it for profit.

They hold up a placard that says socialism over the image of a black man and they hit pay dirt. This is no different from Hitler.

Different time, same techniques.
xxxrayted

Beachwood, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1699
May 9, 2012
 
Pamela wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah but the guy getting $370 a week and doing a little work under the table is still making almost nothing while Rush Limbaugh has a $500 million dollar radio contact. He has a 60 million dollar private jet. If a person is smart enough to survive the recession by taking in less than $1,600 a month in cash and working too, good for him. Why should he work for nothing while a few people make 50 mil. a year??
It has nothing to do with what somebody else makes. If Rush was making $100,000 per year, why should that change the attitude of the unemployed worker? Rush makes the kind of money he does because he produces the profit that he does for his company. What's wrong with that?

I would imagine (or so I'm told) that $370.00 per week would be nothing in CA, but here in Ohio like most places, it's enough to live comfortably for a few years, especially those who have a working spouse. I have several two bedroom apartments here in suburban Cleveland. My rental rates are between $525 and $600 depending on the apartment. I have two tenants who probably don't bring home #370.00 per week working.

Why should people not work and live off of the government? Because we are broke. Not only are we broke, but in serious debt. It seems like the people in our country lose pride and dignity every year. It goes back to what John Kennedy once said "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." But today, we are living quite the opposite of that. This is why we are in serious trouble financially. We have way too many people sitting home waiting to see what their country can do for them.
xxxrayted

Beachwood, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1700
May 9, 2012
 
Bythebay wrote:
<quoted text>
Euros? Euro(s) is a currency what you mean is Europeans or Europe?
The word Socialist or socialism is not a dirty word in Europe, or any other part of the world, it's only the American rightwing propaganda machinery that has managed to distort and corrupt a perfectly good word! Fact is, the US has just as many social programs, including giving huge sums of money to corporations, as most countries in Europe have or practice!
Okay, fine. Let's go with that. The US is a clandestine socialist society. So tell me, how's that working out for us? How's it working out for Europe?

The government doesn't give corporations money, they could only take less in taxation.
frank

Oakland, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1701
May 9, 2012
 
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
It has nothing to do with what somebody else makes. If Rush was making $100,000 per year, why should that change the attitude of the unemployed worker? Rush makes the kind of money he does because he produces the profit that he does for his company. What's wrong with that?
I would imagine (or so I'm told) that $370.00 per week would be nothing in CA, but here in Ohio like most places, it's enough to live comfortably for a few years, especially those who have a working spouse. I have several two bedroom apartments here in suburban Cleveland. My rental rates are between $525 and $600 depending on the apartment. I have two tenants who probably don't bring home #370.00 per week working.
Why should people not work and live off of the government? Because we are broke. Not only are we broke, but in serious debt. It seems like the people in our country lose pride and dignity every year. It goes back to what John Kennedy once said "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." But today, we are living quite the opposite of that. This is why we are in serious trouble financially. We have way too many people sitting home waiting to see what their country can do for them.
I'm sorry man but I never met anyone sitting at home living of the Gov't, have you?, that is just stupid wingnuz talk. I have, however, known numerous people that had been laid off looking for work drawing unemployment, unemployment only last for so long, your entire scheme is absurd. I have known a number of people that had to move out of state to be hired on, your entire wingnuz BS is just that -- BS!
frank

Oakland, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1702
May 9, 2012
 
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, fine. Let's go with that. The US is a clandestine socialist society. So tell me, how's that working out for us? How's it working out for Europe?
The government doesn't give corporations money, they could only take less in taxation.
You are not making any sense, the reason for the global economic downturn is well known and well established it has nothing to do with social Gov't programs you're talking pure wingnuz t-bag nonsense
A Nnoyed

Glasgow, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1703
May 9, 2012
 
Socialist is a dirty word and something to fear for any conservative on any continent.
Pamela

Citrus Heights, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1704
May 9, 2012
 
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
It has nothing to do with what somebody else makes. If Rush was making $100,000 per year, why should that change the attitude of the unemployed worker? Rush makes the kind of money he does because he produces the profit that he does for his company. What's wrong with that?
I would imagine (or so I'm told) that $370.00 per week would be nothing in CA, but here in Ohio like most places, it's enough to live comfortably for a few years, especially those who have a working spouse. I have several two bedroom apartments here in suburban Cleveland. My rental rates are between $525 and $600 depending on the apartment. I have two tenants who probably don't bring home #370.00 per week working.
Why should people not work and live off of the government? Because we are broke. Not only are we broke, but in serious debt. It seems like the people in our country lose pride and dignity every year. It goes back to what John Kennedy once said "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." But today, we are living quite the opposite of that. This is why we are in serious trouble financially. We have way too many people sitting home waiting to see what their country can do for them.
Limbaugh makes 50 million a year, not $100,000 a year. He makes tons more off of the wars that we pay for. We are stuck with the debt from the wars, he made millions off of the wars. I have NO problem with anyone making a tiny bit of money like that and still working. It's chump change. Limbaugh and Hannity are living on 50 MILLION a year, who cares some guy got to make an extra $370 a week for a year?? Good for him. At least he's not a war profiteer. He had to go back to work. He is not on welfare. Who cares? He paid into unemployment. He's not using a radio or TV show to shove trillions of dollars of debt on us by selling us wars. He's not trying to control the elections and control the country's policies for personal profits for himself like the radio and TV guys are. They are just supposed to be reporting news stories. They are not supposed to be controlling elections, starting wars, running up trillions in war debs on a country. It's outrageous.
Pamela

Citrus Heights, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1705
May 9, 2012
 
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, fine. Let's go with that. The US is a clandestine socialist society. So tell me, how's that working out for us? How's it working out for Europe?
The government doesn't give corporations money, they could only take less in taxation.
Yeah but the tea party all wants socialist security and government socialized Medicare and that is where all the money is going. This is the problem you have. Soon, in five years, SS and Medicare will use up 97 percent of the federal budget. Those two programs have 120 trillion dollars of unpaid for promises, unfunded liabilities. They are THE problems and THE driver of the debt. Now, the fake tea party claims to hate socialism and to not want socialism, but, you try taking that 120 trillion bucks in unpaid for promises away from them in socialism and see what they do. They want that massive socialism, and this is the real problem because in reality we would have to create a 25 percent national sales tax to be able to pay the tea party all of that money for those socialism programs, so they need to go full on socialist in order to get those socialist programs.

The real argument is will they agree to fund their socialism like the Europeans do or will they continue to sit with that massive 120 trillion of debt in those programs and simply demand the stuff with no new plan to pay for it?? If they do that, those programs will be ended soon, and they do not want SS and Medicare to end. So they really are faced with admitting that they love socialism and with funding it. That is the reality of the situation.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1,541 - 1,560 of4,941
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••