Total Posts:50|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Shutdown is over.

donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 12:08:42 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
But it was so thrilling :,(
For us people who love to argue everything to a fine point, Government Shutdowns are like political heavens.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 12:38:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Republicans had no idea what their plan was and gave up before it got any worse. Credit to them, for once.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
imabench
Posts: 21,229
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 12:42:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 12:38:01 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Republicans had no idea what their plan was and gave up before it got any worse. Credit to them, for once.

Id like to specify that it wasnt that all the Republicans chose to give up before it got worse, its that enough of them decided to give up before it got any worse

The GOP still voted overwhelmingly against the proposal: http://news.yahoo.com...
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
MassiveDump
Posts: 3,423
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 8:01:56 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Maybe this is too idealistic, so stop me if I'm wrong:

Pass Obamacare. If it works, good. The Democrats were right. If not, good. The Republicans prove that Obama's an idiot. Either way, win-win.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 8:06:39 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 8:01:56 AM, MassiveDump wrote:
Maybe this is too idealistic, so stop me if I'm wrong:

Pass Obamacare. If it works, good. The Democrats were right. If not, good. The Republicans prove that Obama's an idiot. Either way, win-win.

It won't work out that way, believe me.
MassiveDump
Posts: 3,423
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 9:54:46 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 8:06:39 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 10/17/2013 8:01:56 AM, MassiveDump wrote:
Maybe this is too idealistic, so stop me if I'm wrong:

Pass Obamacare. If it works, good. The Democrats were right. If not, good. The Republicans prove that Obama's an idiot. Either way, win-win.

It won't work out that way, believe me.

Why not?
GodChoosesLife
Posts: 3,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 10:01:25 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 8:06:39 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 10/17/2013 8:01:56 AM, MassiveDump wrote:
Maybe this is too idealistic, so stop me if I'm wrong:

Pass Obamacare. If it works, good. The Democrats were right. If not, good. The Republicans prove that Obama's an idiot. Either way, win-win.

It won't work out that way, believe me.

I'm actually with massive on this one, but why do you disagree?
Better than deserved, as ALWAYS.
"The strongest principle of growth lies in human choices."
"The Lord doesn't promise us a perfect life that is free of problems, but he does promise that He'll get us through anything." ~SweeTea
"Good Times" ~ Max
"If Jesus isn't in heaven, then it's not heaven; instead, it's hell." ~anonymous
"Suffering is unimaginably confusing, but it's a way to be drawn closer to God" ~Me
"Tell me what consumes your heart most, and I'll tell you who your God is." ~Dad
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 10:43:29 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 9:54:46 AM, MassiveDump wrote:
At 10/17/2013 8:06:39 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 10/17/2013 8:01:56 AM, MassiveDump wrote:
Maybe this is too idealistic, so stop me if I'm wrong:

Pass Obamacare. If it works, good. The Democrats were right. If not, good. The Republicans prove that Obama's an idiot. Either way, win-win.

It won't work out that way, believe me.

Why not?

Because even when entitlements are failing, they are near impossible politically to reform.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 10:49:34 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 10:43:29 AM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 10/17/2013 9:54:46 AM, MassiveDump wrote:
At 10/17/2013 8:06:39 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 10/17/2013 8:01:56 AM, MassiveDump wrote:
Maybe this is too idealistic, so stop me if I'm wrong:

Pass Obamacare. If it works, good. The Democrats were right. If not, good. The Republicans prove that Obama's an idiot. Either way, win-win.

It won't work out that way, believe me.

Why not?

Because even when entitlements are failing, they are near impossible politically to reform.

When an entitlement program fails, it can't be undone... The people won't let it, even if it bankrupts them. The thing we need to remember is that people are stupid and self-entitled.

This is why Britain's NHS is bankrupt and destroying the nation's finances, and yet the people refuse to let the Government touch it.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 10:52:33 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 8:06:39 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 10/17/2013 8:01:56 AM, MassiveDump wrote:
Maybe this is too idealistic, so stop me if I'm wrong:

Pass Obamacare. If it works, good. The Democrats were right. If not, good. The Republicans prove that Obama's an idiot. Either way, win-win.

It won't work out that way, believe me.

Your wording is a bit ambiguous. Are you trying to say that the Republicans need to attempt to stop Obamacare if they predict that it will be bad? This is probably better explained with a game-theoretic model (Sorry Boehner, this is some damn game). I made one here:

https://docs.google.com...

From my analysis (which is incomplete and I'm open to any possible changes - I'd be glad to add you as a collaborator on this, as well as anyone else), I can conclude that not fighting would have more clear-cut consequences. If Obamacare works, Republicans end up saving some face, and the only voters who will be angry will be ones who will still vote for Republicans no matter what in the first place. If it doesn't work, Democrats will suffer more than the Republicans in any case. If Republicans fight, they will look like idiots if it works (even among their own party), and if it doesn't work, the consequences will be mixed since some will think that Republican interference caused it not to work. Again, this is an analysis from my point of view, I would realistically need a generally Republican voter to look over this chart and check if my weighting of the consequences is correct and see if I left any out.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 11:25:33 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Oh my god .. are you serious?

You idiots on this thread called healthcare reform "entitlements"?

Yes, because the RIGHT to life is now an ENTITLEMENT.

Give your heads a shake.
Thank you for voting!
thett3
Posts: 14,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 11:28:22 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Damn I can feel my so recently restored freedoms being wrenched away as we speak! This shut down had such a huge effect on the status quo didnt it guys?
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 11:48:03 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 11:28:22 AM, thett3 wrote:
Damn I can feel my so recently restored freedoms being wrenched away as we speak! This shut down had such a huge effect on the status quo didnt it guys?

LOL

ANARCHY!!
Thank you for voting!
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 11:58:23 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 11:25:33 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Oh my god .. are you serious?

You idiots on this thread called healthcare reform "entitlements"?

Yes, because the RIGHT to life is now an ENTITLEMENT.

Give your heads a shake.

You imply Healthcare is needed to live... Typical. People didn't need insurance to go to a hospital... Uninsured people got the same treatments by law. There are also thousands of free clinics and non-profit hospitals.

Right to Life is a negative right... Meaning it can't be stopped, but preserving it is a personal responsibility. You should know that.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 12:16:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 11:58:23 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:25:33 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Oh my god .. are you serious?

You idiots on this thread called healthcare reform "entitlements"?

Yes, because the RIGHT to life is now an ENTITLEMENT.

Give your heads a shake.

You imply Healthcare is needed to live... Typical. People didn't need insurance to go to a hospital... Uninsured people got the same treatments by law. There are also thousands of free clinics and non-profit hospitals.

Right to Life is a negative right... Meaning it can't be stopped, but preserving it is a personal responsibility. You should know that.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 1:10:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 8:01:56 AM, MassiveDump wrote:
Maybe this is too idealistic, so stop me if I'm wrong:

Pass Obamacare. If it works, good. The Democrats were right. If not, good. The Republicans prove that Obama's an idiot. Either way, win-win.

Obamacare was passed a long time ago. It is law. It was upheld by the supreme court.

Don't tell Republicans that.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 1:25:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 10:52:33 AM, drhead wrote:
At 10/17/2013 8:06:39 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 10/17/2013 8:01:56 AM, MassiveDump wrote:
Maybe this is too idealistic, so stop me if I'm wrong:

Pass Obamacare. If it works, good. The Democrats were right. If not, good. The Republicans prove that Obama's an idiot. Either way, win-win.

It won't work out that way, believe me.

Your wording is a bit ambiguous. Are you trying to say that the Republicans need to attempt to stop Obamacare if they predict that it will be bad? This is probably better explained with a game-theoretic model (Sorry Boehner, this is some damn game). I made one here:

https://docs.google.com...

From my analysis (which is incomplete and I'm open to any possible changes - I'd be glad to add you as a collaborator on this, as well as anyone else), I can conclude that not fighting would have more clear-cut consequences. If Obamacare works, Republicans end up saving some face, and the only voters who will be angry will be ones who will still vote for Republicans no matter what in the first place. If it doesn't work, Democrats will suffer more than the Republicans in any case. If Republicans fight, they will look like idiots if it works (even among their own party), and if it doesn't work, the consequences will be mixed since some will think that Republican interference caused it not to work. Again, this is an analysis from my point of view, I would realistically need a generally Republican voter to look over this chart and check if my weighting of the consequences is correct and see if I left any out.

You can't analyze accuratly if you presume 50 50 chance for each outcome btw. You need a likelihood modifier

In class atm, so Ill address later
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 1:26:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 11:58:23 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:25:33 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Oh my god .. are you serious?

You idiots on this thread called healthcare reform "entitlements"?

Yes, because the RIGHT to life is now an ENTITLEMENT.

Give your heads a shake.

You imply Healthcare is needed to live... Typical. People didn't need insurance to go to a hospital... Uninsured people got the same treatments by law.

You don't need insurance for anything. Insurance is there so that these incidents do not have as many out-of-pocket expenses. The entire pro-reform side operates on the premise that people ought to be able to get treatment in a hospital without incurring a massive amount of debt which they may never be able to pay off.

There are also thousands of free clinics and non-profit hospitals.

And these "non-profit" hospitals often turn profits anyways, at rates unheard of in any other service industry. Part of "healthcare reform" is making sure organizations don't get away with pulling crap like that. Try again.

Right to Life is a negative right... Meaning it can't be stopped, but preserving it is a personal responsibility. You should know that.

With the extent to which healthcare reform is being done in the US, things hardly have anything to do with the right to life. It deals more with dealing with the consequences of the difficulty of having competition in the health care market than anything else.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 1:34:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 1:25:57 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 10/17/2013 10:52:33 AM, drhead wrote:
At 10/17/2013 8:06:39 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 10/17/2013 8:01:56 AM, MassiveDump wrote:
Maybe this is too idealistic, so stop me if I'm wrong:

Pass Obamacare. If it works, good. The Democrats were right. If not, good. The Republicans prove that Obama's an idiot. Either way, win-win.

It won't work out that way, believe me.

Your wording is a bit ambiguous. Are you trying to say that the Republicans need to attempt to stop Obamacare if they predict that it will be bad? This is probably better explained with a game-theoretic model (Sorry Boehner, this is some damn game). I made one here:

https://docs.google.com...

From my analysis (which is incomplete and I'm open to any possible changes - I'd be glad to add you as a collaborator on this, as well as anyone else), I can conclude that not fighting would have more clear-cut consequences. If Obamacare works, Republicans end up saving some face, and the only voters who will be angry will be ones who will still vote for Republicans no matter what in the first place. If it doesn't work, Democrats will suffer more than the Republicans in any case. If Republicans fight, they will look like idiots if it works (even among their own party), and if it doesn't work, the consequences will be mixed since some will think that Republican interference caused it not to work. Again, this is an analysis from my point of view, I would realistically need a generally Republican voter to look over this chart and check if my weighting of the consequences is correct and see if I left any out.


You can't analyze accuratly if you presume 50 50 chance for each outcome btw. You need a likelihood modifier

In class atm, so Ill address later

You can analyze actually but you cant make conclusions without one
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 1:39:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 1:26:21 PM, drhead wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:58:23 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:25:33 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Oh my god .. are you serious?

You idiots on this thread called healthcare reform "entitlements"?

Yes, because the RIGHT to life is now an ENTITLEMENT.

Give your heads a shake.

You imply Healthcare is needed to live... Typical. People didn't need insurance to go to a hospital... Uninsured people got the same treatments by law.

You don't need insurance for anything. Insurance is there so that these incidents do not have as many out-of-pocket expenses. The entire pro-reform side operates on the premise that people ought to be able to get treatment in a hospital without incurring a massive amount of debt which they may never be able to pay off.

He was arguing against someone who claimed that not having to pay for healthcare was fundamental to the right to life, he simply argued against that.

There are also thousands of free clinics and non-profit hospitals.

And these "non-profit" hospitals often turn profits anyways, at rates unheard of in any other service industry. Part of "healthcare reform" is making sure organizations don't get away with pulling crap like that. Try again.

Studies or examples?

Right to Life is a negative right... Meaning it can't be stopped, but preserving it is a personal responsibility. You should know that.

With the extent to which healthcare reform is being done in the US, things hardly have anything to do with the right to life. It deals more with dealing with the consequences of the difficulty of having competition in the health care market than anything else.
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 1:45:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 10:49:34 AM, donald.keller wrote:
This is why Britain's NHS is bankrupt and destroying the nation's finances, and yet the people refuse to let the Government touch it.

I do love it when yanks randomly pretend to know what is going on with the NHS by way of explaining why poor people shouldn't get medicine/houses/food/the vote.

The reason the NHS is up sh*t creek is, broadly speaking, that the last government used it as a job sink to help hide unemployment and the current government are deliberately screwing with it so they can find an excuse to sell it off. The problem is one of mismanagement and would be relatively easy to reform if there wasn't a major obstacle to reform; not the people, but the government themselves. Both parties are using it as an ideological pawn, with one refusing to accept that they screwed up and the other refusing to not sell off absolutely everything they can get their hands on to their old school chums.

The people are VERY eager for the government to do something about it. There are protests over it in cities all over the country. People have posters up in their windows in support of various NHS reforms. I'm about as much of a raging lefty as you're likely to meet in the UK and even I think the NHS is bloated heap of free-loading civil servants, under-paid and over-worked nurses, waste and mismanagement. That isn't because it is a nationalised institution, it's because politicians have realised that using these things as part of an ideological battle is a better way to attract voters than actually putting forward constructive ideas about to actually make things better, based on evidence and reasoned arguments. Which, by the way, is what just happened to you guys with your economy. You can either keep playing ultra-partisan finger-pointy politics and end up like we are - i.e. this, constantly - or stop and have a chance at doing something interesting and productive for a change. We opted for the former and let the morbid fatsacks turn the entire political process into a pointless farce.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 1:49:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 1:10:15 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 10/17/2013 8:01:56 AM, MassiveDump wrote:
Maybe this is too idealistic, so stop me if I'm wrong:

Pass Obamacare. If it works, good. The Democrats were right. If not, good. The Republicans prove that Obama's an idiot. Either way, win-win.

Obamacare was passed a long time ago. It is law. It was upheld by the supreme court.

Don't tell Republicans that.

I actually think that's a poor argument. Just because something is a law doesn't make it sacrosanct.

The problem (as far as I can tell) is that the funding of Obamacare had nothing to do with the budget. It's self-funded (or funded through other means).

So it wasn't (as some people are portraying) that Congress was simply deciding not to allocate funds to Obamacare (as is their right in deciding the budget) but rather they were tacking on Obamacare as a complete non-sequitor. It would be as if they were attempting to "defund" the U.S. Postal Service (which is also self-funded).

That's why there was always this call for a "clean" CR; Obamacare had nothing to do with the budget to begin with.

The best analogy I could think of is if the positions were reversed and DOMA was upheld by the Supreme Court and the Democrats were tying its repealment to the passing of a Continuing Resolution.
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 1:53:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 1:26:21 PM, drhead wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:58:23 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:25:33 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Oh my god .. are you serious?

You idiots on this thread called healthcare reform "entitlements"?

Yes, because the RIGHT to life is now an ENTITLEMENT.

Give your heads a shake.

You imply Healthcare is needed to live... Typical. People didn't need insurance to go to a hospital... Uninsured people got the same treatments by law.

You don't need insurance for anything. Insurance is there so that these incidents do not have as many out-of-pocket expenses. The entire pro-reform side operates on the premise that people ought to be able to get treatment in a hospital without incurring a massive amount of debt which they may never be able to pay off.

See... Now, if you can't afford it, I have to pay? I didn't break my leg, I shouldn't pay for one. No. We are all entitled our own expanses, even if you didn't want it. Besides, if you can't afford it, it's picked up by other insurances. You also ignored the "free clinic and non-profit hospitals" that charge little to nothing.


There are also thousands of free clinics and non-profit hospitals.

And these "non-profit" hospitals often turn profits anyways, at rates unheard of in any other service industry. Part of "healthcare reform" is making sure organizations don't get away with pulling crap like that. Try again.

All non profit group pull in profit... That's how places like Free Will open new shops. Non-Profit hospitals are still charities, and charge little, and most allow you in for free if you can't afford it. I noticed you didn't bring up the Free Clinics.


Right to Life is a negative right... Meaning it can't be stopped, but preserving it is a personal responsibility. You should know that.

With the extent to which healthcare reform is being done in the US, things hardly have anything to do with the right to life. It deals more with dealing with the consequences of the difficulty of having competition in the health care market than anything else.

What the hell are you countering? I was informing TheHitchslap that Healthcare isn't needed for Right To Life to be upheld, and that Right To Life doesn't defend the ACA like so many believe it does.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 1:54:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 1:39:17 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 10/17/2013 1:26:21 PM, drhead wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:58:23 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:25:33 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Oh my god .. are you serious?

You idiots on this thread called healthcare reform "entitlements"?

Yes, because the RIGHT to life is now an ENTITLEMENT.

Give your heads a shake.

You imply Healthcare is needed to live... Typical. People didn't need insurance to go to a hospital... Uninsured people got the same treatments by law.

You don't need insurance for anything. Insurance is there so that these incidents do not have as many out-of-pocket expenses. The entire pro-reform side operates on the premise that people ought to be able to get treatment in a hospital without incurring a massive amount of debt which they may never be able to pay off.

He was arguing against someone who claimed that not having to pay for healthcare was fundamental to the right to life, he simply argued against that.

Hmm, I didn't catch that in his 30 word post... care to point it out?

There are also thousands of free clinics and non-profit hospitals.

And these "non-profit" hospitals often turn profits anyways, at rates unheard of in any other service industry. Part of "healthcare reform" is making sure organizations don't get away with pulling crap like that. Try again.

Studies or examples?

This is the infographic I traditionally use. I'm assuming the data is all from 2010.

http://healthland.time.com...

Right to Life is a negative right... Meaning it can't be stopped, but preserving it is a personal responsibility. You should know that.

With the extent to which healthcare reform is being done in the US, things hardly have anything to do with the right to life. It deals more with dealing with the consequences of the difficulty of having competition in the health care market than anything else.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 2:00:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 1:45:01 PM, Graincruncher wrote:
At 10/17/2013 10:49:34 AM, donald.keller wrote:
This is why Britain's NHS is bankrupt and destroying the nation's finances, and yet the people refuse to let the Government touch it.

I do love it when yanks randomly pretend to know what is going on with the NHS by way of explaining why poor people shouldn't get medicine/houses/food/the vote.


That's a stupid attack. You brits can talk all you want about the US Government, but an American couldn't possibly know what the British government is like? The logic would lose you a debate quicker than an ff. I don't have to be British to understand British issues... Especially when it's the British constantly complaining about it.

Britain is like a person living in a burning mansion... He complains that the fire department isn't putting out the fire, but than stops them each time they try to put out an area of the fire... "No no, not that room!"

But seriously. You lose credibility when you use that horrible attack "You don't live here, so you wouldn't know!"
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 2:01:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 1:54:42 PM, drhead wrote:
At 10/17/2013 1:39:17 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 10/17/2013 1:26:21 PM, drhead wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:58:23 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:25:33 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Oh my god .. are you serious?

You idiots on this thread called healthcare reform "entitlements"?

Yes, because the RIGHT to life is now an ENTITLEMENT.

Give your heads a shake.

You imply Healthcare is needed to live... Typical. People didn't need insurance to go to a hospital... Uninsured people got the same treatments by law.

You don't need insurance for anything. Insurance is there so that these incidents do not have as many out-of-pocket expenses. The entire pro-reform side operates on the premise that people ought to be able to get treatment in a hospital without incurring a massive amount of debt which they may never be able to pay off.

He was arguing against someone who claimed that not having to pay for healthcare was fundamental to the right to life, he simply argued against that.

Hmm, I didn't catch that in his 30 word post... care to point it out?

I didn't have to... Everyone else already caught it by reading the first persons post.


There are also thousands of free clinics and non-profit hospitals.

And these "non-profit" hospitals often turn profits anyways, at rates unheard of in any other service industry. Part of "healthcare reform" is making sure organizations don't get away with pulling crap like that. Try again.

Studies or examples?

This is the infographic I traditionally use. I'm assuming the data is all from 2010.

http://healthland.time.com...

Right to Life is a negative right... Meaning it can't be stopped, but preserving it is a personal responsibility. You should know that.

With the extent to which healthcare reform is being done in the US, things hardly have anything to do with the right to life. It deals more with dealing with the consequences of the difficulty of having competition in the health care market than anything else.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 2:10:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 1:53:06 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/17/2013 1:26:21 PM, drhead wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:58:23 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:25:33 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Oh my god .. are you serious?

You idiots on this thread called healthcare reform "entitlements"?

Yes, because the RIGHT to life is now an ENTITLEMENT.

Give your heads a shake.

You imply Healthcare is needed to live... Typical. People didn't need insurance to go to a hospital... Uninsured people got the same treatments by law.

You don't need insurance for anything. Insurance is there so that these incidents do not have as many out-of-pocket expenses. The entire pro-reform side operates on the premise that people ought to be able to get treatment in a hospital without incurring a massive amount of debt which they may never be able to pay off.

See... Now, if you can't afford it, I have to pay? I didn't break my leg, I shouldn't pay for one. No. We are all entitled our own expanses, even if you didn't want it. Besides, if you can't afford it, it's picked up by other insurances. You also ignored the "free clinic and non-profit hospitals" that charge little to nothing.

You should know as well as I do that free clinics are generally for minor medical conditions which most people would either treat at home or visit their doctor for. They aren't equipped for all medical emergencies, and aren't a replacement for a hospital. I did not bring up non-profits since I planned to address those later in the post, in case you did not notice...

There are also thousands of free clinics and non-profit hospitals.

And these "non-profit" hospitals often turn profits anyways, at rates unheard of in any other service industry. Part of "healthcare reform" is making sure organizations don't get away with pulling crap like that. Try again.

All non profit group pull in profit... That's how places like Free Will open new shops. Non-Profit hospitals are still charities, and charge little, and most allow you in for free if you can't afford it. I noticed you didn't bring up the Free Clinics.

Yes, non-profits get some profit. No, they don't typically get 25% profit margins. Do you see the problem here?

Right to Life is a negative right... Meaning it can't be stopped, but preserving it is a personal responsibility. You should know that.

With the extent to which healthcare reform is being done in the US, things hardly have anything to do with the right to life. It deals more with dealing with the consequences of the difficulty of having competition in the health care market than anything else.

What the hell are you countering? I was informing TheHitchslap that Healthcare isn't needed for Right To Life to be upheld, and that Right To Life doesn't defend the ACA like so many believe it does.

I was arguing that it is irrelevant. The ACA doesn't rest on the premise of the right to life, and thus doesn't need it as a defense.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 2:17:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 2:01:28 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/17/2013 1:54:42 PM, drhead wrote:
At 10/17/2013 1:39:17 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 10/17/2013 1:26:21 PM, drhead wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:58:23 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:25:33 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Oh my god .. are you serious?

You idiots on this thread called healthcare reform "entitlements"?

Yes, because the RIGHT to life is now an ENTITLEMENT.

Give your heads a shake.

You imply Healthcare is needed to live... Typical. People didn't need insurance to go to a hospital... Uninsured people got the same treatments by law.

You don't need insurance for anything. Insurance is there so that these incidents do not have as many out-of-pocket expenses. The entire pro-reform side operates on the premise that people ought to be able to get treatment in a hospital without incurring a massive amount of debt which they may never be able to pay off.

He was arguing against someone who claimed that not having to pay for healthcare was fundamental to the right to life, he simply argued against that.

Hmm, I didn't catch that in his 30 word post... care to point it out?

I didn't have to... Everyone else already caught it by reading the first persons post.

In that case, I can only assume you are talking about an imaginary health care system where people do not understand that their tax money is what is paying for their healthcare. You do realize that people in countries which have universal healthcare generally view this as a social contract that they are fine with having, right? People pay into a pool of money, and are allowed to use that money if they are ever injured or are otherwise in need of health care.

There are also thousands of free clinics and non-profit hospitals.

And these "non-profit" hospitals often turn profits anyways, at rates unheard of in any other service industry. Part of "healthcare reform" is making sure organizations don't get away with pulling crap like that. Try again.

Studies or examples?

This is the infographic I traditionally use. I'm assuming the data is all from 2010.

http://healthland.time.com...

Right to Life is a negative right... Meaning it can't be stopped, but preserving it is a personal responsibility. You should know that.

With the extent to which healthcare reform is being done in the US, things hardly have anything to do with the right to life. It deals more with dealing with the consequences of the difficulty of having competition in the health care market than anything else.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 2:21:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 2:10:19 PM, drhead wrote:
At 10/17/2013 1:53:06 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/17/2013 1:26:21 PM, drhead wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:58:23 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/17/2013 11:25:33 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Oh my god .. are you serious?

You idiots on this thread called healthcare reform "entitlements"?

Yes, because the RIGHT to life is now an ENTITLEMENT.

Give your heads a shake.

You imply Healthcare is needed to live... Typical. People didn't need insurance to go to a hospital... Uninsured people got the same treatments by law.

You don't need insurance for anything. Insurance is there so that these incidents do not have as many out-of-pocket expenses. The entire pro-reform side operates on the premise that people ought to be able to get treatment in a hospital without incurring a massive amount of debt which they may never be able to pay off.

See... Now, if you can't afford it, I have to pay? I didn't break my leg, I shouldn't pay for one. No. We are all entitled our own expanses, even if you didn't want it. Besides, if you can't afford it, it's picked up by other insurances. You also ignored the "free clinic and non-profit hospitals" that charge little to nothing.

You should know as well as I do that free clinics are generally for minor medical conditions which most people would either treat at home or visit their doctor for. They aren't equipped for all medical emergencies, and aren't a replacement for a hospital. I did not bring up non-profits since I planned to address those later in the post, in case you did not notice...

The mass majority of visits can be handled by a free clinic. The reason most uninsured get sick is because they don't get check ups and small things... That's on them since nothing was stopping them. Most issues (especially from the uninsured) could have been prevented by going to a clinic for a check up. Again, that's on the uninsured for not going. If they don't know they can go, than tell them.


There are also thousands of free clinics and non-profit hospitals.

And these "non-profit" hospitals often turn profits anyways, at rates unheard of in any other service industry. Part of "healthcare reform" is making sure organizations don't get away with pulling crap like that. Try again.

All non profit group pull in profit... That's how places like Free Will open new shops. Non-Profit hospitals are still charities, and charge little, and most allow you in for free if you can't afford it. I noticed you didn't bring up the Free Clinics.

Yes, non-profits get some profit. No, they don't typically get 25% profit margins. Do you see the problem here?

No. Hospitals cost a lot of money to build and upgrade. It takes a lot of cash to expand the building, or make a new hospital all together. It takes vast profit margins to cover that. If the hospital needs to upgrade even a small device, it can cost thousands, and that builds up when you need to upgrade or replace all the {device type} in the building. Hospitals of all types require vast profit to keep themselves first-world.

They are still more affordable, and often times pays the bill for you. In fact, most hospitals have their own insurance for uninsured who need help.


Right to Life is a negative right... Meaning it can't be stopped, but preserving it is a personal responsibility. You should know that.

With the extent to which healthcare reform is being done in the US, things hardly have anything to do with the right to life. It deals more with dealing with the consequences of the difficulty of having competition in the health care market than anything else.

What the hell are you countering? I was informing TheHitchslap that Healthcare isn't needed for Right To Life to be upheld, and that Right To Life doesn't defend the ACA like so many believe it does.

I was arguing that it is irrelevant. The ACA doesn't rest on the premise of the right to life, and thus doesn't need it as a defense.

I was arguing that too... That the Right To Life isn't relevant to the ACA. I wasn't attacking the ACA with it it, but implying the ACA has nothing to do with it. I don't think you read TheHitchslap's op before reading mine.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --