By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Senator John McCain casts deciding vote against "Skinny Repeal"

 

Healthcare you want for the US

Single Payer (All taxes) 83 57.24%
 
Multi-Payer (Government option) 24 16.55%
 
Heavy regulations (Capita... 6 4.14%
 
Moderate regulation 14 9.66%
 
No regulation 14 9.66%
 
Alternative Medicine 4 2.76%
 
Total:145

"Maybe the real Repeal was the friends we made along the way"



Around the Network
vivster said:

It's obviously voter fraud. Millions of illegal immigrants in the senate are voting against the bill.

Hahaha, that actually sounds like something Trump would tweet.



andrewclear said:
Hiku said:

There's a big difference between a social democracy and communism. If you think that that Bernie is pushing for communism in USA and not the social democracy model in most other developed western nations, then I don't know what to say. Not that USA isn't already very socialistic with social security, public schooloing, the roads you drive on, etc. But lets pretend that one healthcare program would suddenly make all the difference and drive you to communism.
Bernie can make as much money as he wants, as long as he doesn't accepts corporate donations.

Yeah, books are made by corporations, like every other product. That's not really what "not taking coprporate money" is refering to.
When you make a book deal, the book company makes an investment, and not a donation, which they earn back from taking a part of the sales revenue.
When a pharma company donates a million to your political campaign, they expect your vote in return.

I don't know about his lake house, but I'm guessing it's about as mysterious as Barack Obama's birth cirtificate.
Why is it so hard to believe that a politician doesn't take corporate donations? That's common practice in many other countries, where corporate donations are illegal. I don't think Bernie is perfect btw as I don't agree with every decision he makes. But in this regard he seems a lot better than most politicians.

He took money from the corporation PACS.  He also took money from schools, etc.  Taking money from unions / activists groups / and government organizations is the same as taking money from corporations.  Here is a link to some PACS he took money from https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=n00000528

Yes, he is advocating communism, and it is sad people are blind to it.  He is against private ownership of business, why else is he attacking corporations, banks, etc?  Without private ownership, you get public ownership, which is government ownership, which is basis of communism.  Some people are confused and believe communism is a political model for governance not an economic model, which is what it is.  

If the government controls the healthcare industry, that is one more industry taken away from the public and ran by the government.  And, y s, they would control it, make no mistake.  Look at the Charlie Gard situation.  They wouldn't even let the family take the kid overseas for experimental treatment.  Just ordered him to go to a hospice and die.  Welcome to government control.  No freedom.

 

For the record, I do not hatr corporations, a lot of them are good and treat their employees well,  it you don't hear about them all that much.  I do hate some of the CEOs and I hate how some companies care too much about their share price and will do evqery unethical thing to raise it.  But that is human nature, we are not altruistic, we are greedy, and we look out for our own interests first.  Quit drInking the blue koolaid (I tell conservatives to quit drinking the red koolaid as well).  If you really think these politicians care about you, then you are part of the problem that people in this country are actually being hurt by the government.  These people don't care.

Also, complaining about politicians taking money from corporations and doing favors from them, then supporting a party that literally buys votes from people with tax payer money, is pretty damn hypocritical.

It is sad that you are blind to what he is actually advocating.



barneystinson69 said:
vivster said:

Where did they say this? Obamacare is already barely working due to countless exceptions for people to opt out of it. How the fuck would you make Healthcare better by making tax payers pay even less?

That's like saying "We will fix the infrastructure of the country by cutting income tax to 0%". Because who needs money to pay for services.

Look, costs in general are out of control. Health care in the US is far more expensive to taxpayers and individuals than it should be. Fact is, a single-payer system that is done right ends up being cheaper than having to rely on insurance. I'm sure democrats wouldn't mind if taxpayers would pay less either while keeping Obamacare. How that is done, well maybe trying to fight for lower prices from pharmaceuticals companies would help, but I'm not a politican.

Problem are your rip-off Pharma companies...prices for medicine in the US are out of control. The ugly face of turbo capitalism in your country.

 

vivster said:
Mr Puggsly said:

But think about how many Canadians will suffer by not having a place to go while their country makes them wait!

Another easy solution is let the free market bring the cost of healthcare down. Its amazing what could happen if the government doesn't have a stranglehold.

Wait what? Really? No wait, I must've read that wrong. Nope, you really said that. Still, cannot believe it though.

The free market is the fucking cause of the price explosion in things related to healthcare. Because the free market knows that people can't live without essentials like healthcare and as such can demand the highest prices. The fuck is the government doing to increase the prices?

Seriously, you cannot possibly believe this.

Trump defenders like Mr Puggsly will do anything to distract themselves from reality.



Errorist76 said:
barneystinson69 said:

Look, costs in general are out of control. Health care in the US is far more expensive to taxpayers and individuals than it should be. Fact is, a single-payer system that is done right ends up being cheaper than having to rely on insurance. I'm sure democrats wouldn't mind if taxpayers would pay less either while keeping Obamacare. How that is done, well maybe trying to fight for lower prices from pharmaceuticals companies would help, but I'm not a politican.

Problem are your rip-off Pharma companies...prices for medicine in the US are out of control. 

Yeah, we really just need price regulation in the U.S. But all the politicians are in the pocketbooks of corperations so it won't happen. 



Around the Network
Cerebralbore101 said:
Errorist76 said:

Problem are your rip-off Pharma companies...prices for medicine in the US are out of control. 

Yeah, we really just need price regulation in the U.S. But all the politicians are in the pocketbooks of corperations so it won't happen. 

Yah, you know as earlier in this thread people will label it as 'communist' and unrealistic socialist ideas anyway, even though the most developed countries on this planet with the highest standard of life use such a system.



John McCain's 15 min speech was a thing of beauty. He's a dying man with only a few months left to live and he let those assholes have it. Great speech.



Hiku said:
DonFerrari said:

Yes. And we shall not decide someone is like a saint because we don't have access to more information.

But the point wasn't even talking about Bernie, whom would destroy the country if his socialistics ideas were implemented, but about thinking that banning corporate financing to politicians would make all better.

Why would you think a company donating money wants politicians to do illegal things and people donating money wouldn't want favors as well?

Not treating anyone as a saint. But there's no point in throwing baseless accusation.
The only thing politicians can do to avoid being bought by corporations is to not accept corporate or pac donations, and that's what he has been doing as far as I can tell. The point wasn't to talk about Bernie or how his socialistic ideas (single payer healthcare) would help the country like every other modern first world nation where living standards are higher than USA's. But he is the most well known example in US politics when it comes to avoiding corporate donations for over 30 years.

I don't know what you mean by illegal things? The votes the bribed politicians cast are legal in the US. But they are not in the interest of the American people. They are in the interest of the corporations finances. USA spends 2-3 times more on healthcare than the U.K. per capita/person. But they get a lot less in return. Why? If they spend 2-3 times more per person than the UK, and the UK guarantees healthcare to everyone, why isn't USA guaranteeing healthcare to their sitizens when they spend that much more per person?
Because what differs USA from pretty much every other country is that a much larger portion of those spending goes towards corporate profit, instead of to the people. And there are two reasons for this. One is because political bribes from corporations are legal in the US. And the other reason is because many years ago they passed a law that forbids the US government from negotiating drug prices with pharma companies.
Because of that, you can buy the same US manufactured medicine, from Canada (after it has been exported to Canada from USA) for up to 5 times cheaper than if you buy it in USA. That's ridiculous. Drug prices go up every year in the US, because the goverment can't negotiate the prices.

A single corporation can donate a large amount of money and expect a politician to vote in their favor.
A single small donor cannot, because there's a limit to how much a small donor can donate, and it's not going to be worth a huge favor like a vote.
However, if many small donors want the same thing and make their voices heard, the politician could grant their wish. That's not a bad thing because then you are working for the people, and the ones who voted you in, or helped to donate to your cause. But when you vote for pharma companies, they are never in the interest of the common people.

Bribing the voters with promises based on taxpayers money is good then?

yes a law forbiding negotiation is a bad thing and government "taking care" to things is exactaly what enables most of it. A single body negotiating hundred billions dollars that can be used to buy not what is better to all, but what is more interesting to them is the problem. Socialist and the like fail to notice this exact point. You'll complain about politics being corrupt but then will say you want government to be even bigger. Or say corporations are greedy or that they explore their employees while their margins are like 10% and the government taxes on the people is 40%. Who is the real gready explorer?

Open the accountability of the to health companies in USA and see if their profit margins are 3x higher than other places.

Again. individual contributions solve nothing as they can mask all donations with proxy donors.

Public domations are better than secret ones because you know they are hapening. And that is why lobby was made legal.

andrewclear said:
DonFerrari said:

Yes. And we shall not decide someone is like a saint because we don't have access to more information.

But the point wasn't even talking about Bernie, whom would destroy the country if his socialistics ideas were implemented, but about thinking that banning corporate financing to politicians would make all better.

Why would you think a company donating money wants politicians to do illegal things and people donating money wouldn't want favors as well?

Isn't as well give up on this guy, he bought the propaganda hooks, line, and sinker.  We also know what PACs gave Bernie money, he just never paid attention to that data, https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=n00000528

 

Also, he only talks bad about donations from big corporations, and Republicans mainly.  He doesn't talk bad about donations from special interests groups (which are big business in this country), government organizations (which soils the be allowed to donate to a party), unions, etc.  Hell, he doesn't even realize that big corporations donate to the Democrats as well.  The lack of critical thinking in this country is amazing.  The propaganda from the Democrats is also amazing, in that all these people buy that crap, and never actually research or think why a lot of it is either false, or only half true,

We all know the hypocrisy of the rich leftwingers.

Cerebralbore101 said:
Errorist76 said:

Problem are your rip-off Pharma companies...prices for medicine in the US are out of control. 

Yeah, we really just need price regulation in the U.S. But all the politicians are in the pocketbooks of corperations so it won't happen. 

You don't need it. Will give you two very good examples of how much good rice regulation does... Brazil during 80's and early 90's and Venezuela of now... do you know what happens when government force or freeze prices? The products stop being made.

Errorist76 said:
Cerebralbore101 said:

Yeah, we really just need price regulation in the U.S. But all the politicians are in the pocketbooks of corperations so it won't happen. 

Yah, you know as earlier in this thread people will label it as 'communist' and unrealistic socialist ideas anyway, even though the most developed countries on this planet with the highest standard of life use such a system.

You mean the ones on verge of bankrucy and that are less than 10% the size of USA?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:
Hiku said:

Not treating anyone as a saint. But there's no point in throwing baseless accusation.
The only thing politicians can do to avoid being bought by corporations is to not accept corporate or pac donations, and that's what he has been doing as far as I can tell. The point wasn't to talk about Bernie or how his socialistic ideas (single payer healthcare) would help the country like every other modern first world nation where living standards are higher than USA's. But he is the most well known example in US politics when it comes to avoiding corporate donations for over 30 years.

I don't know what you mean by illegal things? The votes the bribed politicians cast are legal in the US. But they are not in the interest of the American people. They are in the interest of the corporations finances. USA spends 2-3 times more on healthcare than the U.K. per capita/person. But they get a lot less in return. Why? If they spend 2-3 times more per person than the UK, and the UK guarantees healthcare to everyone, why isn't USA guaranteeing healthcare to their sitizens when they spend that much more per person?
Because what differs USA from pretty much every other country is that a much larger portion of those spending goes towards corporate profit, instead of to the people. And there are two reasons for this. One is because political bribes from corporations are legal in the US. And the other reason is because many years ago they passed a law that forbids the US government from negotiating drug prices with pharma companies.
Because of that, you can buy the same US manufactured medicine, from Canada (after it has been exported to Canada from USA) for up to 5 times cheaper than if you buy it in USA. That's ridiculous. Drug prices go up every year in the US, because the goverment can't negotiate the prices.

A single corporation can donate a large amount of money and expect a politician to vote in their favor.
A single small donor cannot, because there's a limit to how much a small donor can donate, and it's not going to be worth a huge favor like a vote.
However, if many small donors want the same thing and make their voices heard, the politician could grant their wish. That's not a bad thing because then you are working for the people, and the ones who voted you in, or helped to donate to your cause. But when you vote for pharma companies, they are never in the interest of the common people.

Bribing the voters with promises based on taxpayers money is good then?

yes a law forbiding negotiation is a bad thing and government "taking care" to things is exactaly what enables most of it. A single body negotiating hundred billions dollars that can be used to buy not what is better to all, but what is more interesting to them is the problem. Socialist and the like fail to notice this exact point. You'll complain about politics being corrupt but then will say you want government to be even bigger. Or say corporations are greedy or that they explore their employees while their margins are like 10% and the government taxes on the people is 40%. Who is the real gready explorer?

Open the accountability of the to health companies in USA and see if their profit margins are 3x higher than other places.

Again. individual contributions solve nothing as they can mask all donations with proxy donors.

Public domations are better than secret ones because you know they are hapening. And that is why lobby was made legal.

andrewclear said:

Isn't as well give up on this guy, he bought the propaganda hooks, line, and sinker.  We also know what PACs gave Bernie money, he just never paid attention to that data, https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=n00000528

 

Also, he only talks bad about donations from big corporations, and Republicans mainly.  He doesn't talk bad about donations from special interests groups (which are big business in this country), government organizations (which soils the be allowed to donate to a party), unions, etc.  Hell, he doesn't even realize that big corporations donate to the Democrats as well.  The lack of critical thinking in this country is amazing.  The propaganda from the Democrats is also amazing, in that all these people buy that crap, and never actually research or think why a lot of it is either false, or only half true,

We all know the hypocrisy of the rich leftwingers.

Cerebralbore101 said:

Yeah, we really just need price regulation in the U.S. But all the politicians are in the pocketbooks of corperations so it won't happen. 

You don't need it. Will give you two very good examples of how much good rice regulation does... Brazil during 80's and early 90's and Venezuela of now... do you know what happens when government force or freeze prices? The products stop being made.

Errorist76 said:

Yah, you know as earlier in this thread people will label it as 'communist' and unrealistic socialist ideas anyway, even though the most developed countries on this planet with the highest standard of life use such a system.

You mean the ones on verge of bankrucy and that are less than 10% the size of USA?

 

That's funny because I know for a fact that Norway is doing a hell a lot better than us financial wise. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01/11/oil-fund-norway-millionaires_n_4576887.html

TallSilhouette said:

Is it over? At least as far as healthcare is concerned? Like, for real this time? No more fast, loose, and ultra shady attempts at repealing and/or replacing the ACA with some form of the AHCA? No more delays and necros in order to rebrand it and finagle more votes? Can we put this nightmare behind us for the foreseeable future? I want to believe...

Well, the ACA is designed to fail. If it's not replaced in the next 3-5 years, then the situation will be far more dire than it would be under any proposed plan. I do hope some group can get together and pass something better than the nightmare we have right now.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.