Chicago Fanatics Message Board
http://chicagofanatics.com/

Danny on the twitter muscle II
http://chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=99688
Page 22 of 68

Author:  Brick [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 9:28 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

Good to know my B96 phase was actually me consuming "real art".

Ghetto Superstar, that is what you are!

Author:  rogers park bryan [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 1:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

Quote:
The Associated PressVerified account @AP
The Latest: Nevada Sen. Dean GOP Heller a 'yes' on taking up health care bill. http://apne.ws/EZjqYpu

Quote:
Dan Bernstein
It's going to pass. Too much to gain from denying health care access to the poor in order to enrich the richest. Despicable.

Author:  Jaw Breaker [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 1:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

rogers park bryan wrote:
Quote:
The Associated PressVerified account @AP
The Latest: Nevada Sen. Dean GOP Heller a 'yes' on taking up health care bill. http://apne.ws/EZjqYpu

Quote:
Dan Bernstein
It's going to pass. Too much to gain from denying health care access to the poor in order to enrich the richest. Despicable.


Dan has no idea what he's talking about.

Author:  pittmike [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 1:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

Jaw Breaker wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Quote:
The Associated PressVerified account @AP
The Latest: Nevada Sen. Dean GOP Heller a 'yes' on taking up health care bill. http://apne.ws/EZjqYpu

Quote:
Dan Bernstein
It's going to pass. Too much to gain from denying health care access to the poor in order to enrich the richest. Despicable.


Dan has no idea what he's talking about.


Doesn't matter. His people will believe him and suck it up.

Author:  rogers park bryan [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

So you guys are saying that Trumpcare is not taking from the poor to give to the rich?

Author:  pittmike [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

rogers park bryan wrote:
So you guys are saying that Trumpcare is not taking from the poor to give to the rich?


I don't think anyone knows because nothing exists yet. Or we have to pass it to know what is in it. Your choice.

Author:  rogers park bryan [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

pittmike wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So you guys are saying that Trumpcare is not taking from the poor to give to the rich?


I don't think anyone knows because nothing exists yet. Or we have to pass it to know what is in it. Your choice.

Pelosi's dumb ass quote is completely irrelevant here. And we do know a lot about this bill. CBO says 20 million plus will lose insurance.

Author:  pittmike [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

For the house. There is no senate bill at all yet.

Author:  DAC [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

pittmike wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So you guys are saying that Trumpcare is not taking from the poor to give to the rich?


I don't think anyone knows because nothing exists yet. Or we have to pass it to know what is in it. Your choice.


We have a pretty good idea what it's going to look like. I don't need to see all the details to know who will benefit and who will suffer if the GOP gets the health care bill they desire.

Author:  rogers park bryan [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

pittmike wrote:
For the house. There is no senate bill at all yet.

The number of uninsured will increase by 22 million Americans under the Senate Republican leadership’s Better Care Reconciliation Act, which is only slightly better than the U.S. House of Representatives' American Health Care Act, the Congressional Budget Office said Monday.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapse ... bed9c3eaa2

Author:  ZephMarshack [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

pittmike wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So you guys are saying that Trumpcare is not taking from the poor to give to the rich?


I don't think anyone knows because nothing exists yet. Or we have to pass it to know what is in it. Your choice.

I'm sure there's an equal chance that whatever passes the Senate is in fact really good and we have to allow for the possibility that it will actually increase and improve coverage. We definitely shouldn't rush to judgment and the Republicans going about this in the least transparent way possible doesn't mean we have to unfairly and automatically expect anything bad!

Author:  pittmike [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

:lol: transparency issues are only republican regarding healthcare.

As for this crowd trust me I have no faith they will repeal which I want. They will doctor as it is in and damage is done. We are stuck forever.

I would expect with a full repeal yes 22 million lose something. In my world start from scratch for a plan including them.

Author:  ZephMarshack [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

pittmike wrote:
:lol: transparency issues are only republican regarding healthcare.

As for this crowd trust me I have no faith they will repeal which I want. They will doctor as it is in and damage is done. We are stuck forever.

I would expect with a full repeal yes 22 million lose something. In my world start from scratch for a plan including them.

Yes, the Republicans have been unequivocally far less transparent during this affair than the Dems were when they passed the shit known as Obamacare. And these guys have done a bangup job so far in demonstrating their aptitude for a whole new system; I'm sure those 22 million would be without insurance for a week or two tops if you get your full repeal. A minor inconvenience at best.

Author:  pittmike [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 5:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

ZephMarshack wrote:
pittmike wrote:
:lol: transparency issues are only republican regarding healthcare.

As for this crowd trust me I have no faith they will repeal which I want. They will doctor as it is in and damage is done. We are stuck forever.

I would expect with a full repeal yes 22 million lose something. In my world start from scratch for a plan including them.

Yes, the Republicans have been unequivocally far less transparent during this affair than the Dems were when they passed the shit known as Obamacare. And these guys have done a bangup job so far in demonstrating their aptitude for a whole new system; I'm sure those 22 million would be without insurance for a week or two tops if you get your full repeal. A minor inconvenience at best.


The right is not trying to be inclusive it seems to me. If you or anyone here really believes the right is less transparent now than the left during Obamacare reconciliation fiasco you are delusional.

As for inconvenience going back to what people had before and starting over can probably be done using temporary grandfather type clauses.

Author:  ZephMarshack [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 5:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

pittmike wrote:
ZephMarshack wrote:
pittmike wrote:
:lol: transparency issues are only republican regarding healthcare.

As for this crowd trust me I have no faith they will repeal which I want. They will doctor as it is in and damage is done. We are stuck forever.

I would expect with a full repeal yes 22 million lose something. In my world start from scratch for a plan including them.

Yes, the Republicans have been unequivocally far less transparent during this affair than the Dems were when they passed the shit known as Obamacare. And these guys have done a bangup job so far in demonstrating their aptitude for a whole new system; I'm sure those 22 million would be without insurance for a week or two tops if you get your full repeal. A minor inconvenience at best.


The right is not trying to be inclusive it seems to me. If you or anyone here really believes the right is less transparent now than the left during Obamacare reconciliation fiasco you are delusional.

As for inconvenience going back to what people had before and starting over can probably be done using temporary grandfather type clauses.

The people who actually study public policy for a living must be delusional then (and in before Snopes is a biased source/professors of public policy all have a leftist bent)! Obamacare was debated across multiple bipartisan committees of Congress for months on end well prior to actually passing the House. There have been no equivalent public hearings for any of the replacement plans and all versions at this point have been written in almost complete secrecy, intended to get through the floor with as little bipartisan debate as possible and as little public scrutiny as well.

Also those grandfather clauses you're now advocating sound an awful lot like big government preserving the status quo to me. What happened to starting from scratch??

Author:  Kirkwood [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 5:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

pittmike wrote:
If you or anyone here really believes the right is less transparent now than the left during Obamacare reconciliation fiasco you are delusional.

everyone believes that. they see what is happening.

Author:  pittmike [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 5:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

A type of clause to bridge from now until the new plan after going back to scratch. Follow? And quote whatever you like. My opinion is reconciliation as it was used and "we have to pass it to know what is in it" is. It transparency. Have a good evening.

Author:  Brick [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 5:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

ZephMarshack wrote:
pittmike wrote:
ZephMarshack wrote:
pittmike wrote:
:lol: transparency issues are only republican regarding healthcare.

As for this crowd trust me I have no faith they will repeal which I want. They will doctor as it is in and damage is done. We are stuck forever.

I would expect with a full repeal yes 22 million lose something. In my world start from scratch for a plan including them.

Yes, the Republicans have been unequivocally far less transparent during this affair than the Dems were when they passed the shit known as Obamacare. And these guys have done a bangup job so far in demonstrating their aptitude for a whole new system; I'm sure those 22 million would be without insurance for a week or two tops if you get your full repeal. A minor inconvenience at best.


The right is not trying to be inclusive it seems to me. If you or anyone here really believes the right is less transparent now than the left during Obamacare reconciliation fiasco you are delusional.

As for inconvenience going back to what people had before and starting over can probably be done using temporary grandfather type clauses.

The people who actually study public policy for a living must be delusional then (and in before Snopes is a biased source/professors of public policy all have a leftist bent)! Obamacare was debated across multiple bipartisan committees of Congress for months on end well prior to actually passing the House. There have been no equivalent public hearings for any of the replacement plans and all versions at this point have been written in almost complete secrecy, intended to get through the floor with as little bipartisan debate as possible and as little public scrutiny as well.

Also those grandfather clauses you're now advocating sound an awful lot like big government preserving the status quo to me. What happened to starting from scratch??

Isn't the Democrats stance that it must stay in full? What new ideas will they give?

Author:  ZephMarshack [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 5:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

Boilermaker Rick wrote:
ZephMarshack wrote:
pittmike wrote:
ZephMarshack wrote:
pittmike wrote:
:lol: transparency issues are only republican regarding healthcare.

As for this crowd trust me I have no faith they will repeal which I want. They will doctor as it is in and damage is done. We are stuck forever.

I would expect with a full repeal yes 22 million lose something. In my world start from scratch for a plan including them.

Yes, the Republicans have been unequivocally far less transparent during this affair than the Dems were when they passed the shit known as Obamacare. And these guys have done a bangup job so far in demonstrating their aptitude for a whole new system; I'm sure those 22 million would be without insurance for a week or two tops if you get your full repeal. A minor inconvenience at best.


The right is not trying to be inclusive it seems to me. If you or anyone here really believes the right is less transparent now than the left during Obamacare reconciliation fiasco you are delusional.

As for inconvenience going back to what people had before and starting over can probably be done using temporary grandfather type clauses.

The people who actually study public policy for a living must be delusional then (and in before Snopes is a biased source/professors of public policy all have a leftist bent)! Obamacare was debated across multiple bipartisan committees of Congress for months on end well prior to actually passing the House. There have been no equivalent public hearings for any of the replacement plans and all versions at this point have been written in almost complete secrecy, intended to get through the floor with as little bipartisan debate as possible and as little public scrutiny as well.

Also those grandfather clauses you're now advocating sound an awful lot like big government preserving the status quo to me. What happened to starting from scratch??

Isn't the Democrats stance that it must stay in full? What new ideas will they give?

Ah, so the Republicans are once again optimizing efficiency in government spending by holding literally no public hearings. Hell, most people won't even read bills anyway, so why publicize any part of the drafting process at all?

Author:  ZephMarshack [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 5:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

pittmike wrote:
A type of clause to bridge from now until the new plan after going back to scratch. Follow? And quote whatever you like. My opinion is reconciliation as it was used and "we have to pass it to know what is in it" is. It transparency. Have a good evening.

I didn't realize that all bills passed with reconciliation were equivalent by default in terms of transparency. Have a nice night "But Obamaing."

Author:  Baby McNown [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 7:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

rogers park bryan wrote:
pittmike wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So you guys are saying that Trumpcare is not taking from the poor to give to the rich?


I don't think anyone knows because nothing exists yet. Or we have to pass it to know what is in it. Your choice.

Pelosi's dumb ass quote is completely irrelevant here. And we do know a lot about this bill. CBO says 20 million plus will lose insurance.

They do love their talking points don't they?

Author:  Jaw Breaker [ Tue Jul 25, 2017 10:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

rogers park bryan wrote:
So you guys are saying that Trumpcare is not taking from the poor to give to the rich?


No, I think it's more accurate to say it would take from the poor to give to the middle class, and take from the old to give to the young.

Author:  ZephMarshack [ Wed Jul 26, 2017 5:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

Jaw Breaker wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So you guys are saying that Trumpcare is not taking from the poor to give to the rich?


No, I think it's more accurate to say it would take from the poor to give to the middle class, and take from the old to give to the young.

Would it be accurate to say that the $275 billion in tax cuts for the top 5% in the House bill and the $33 billion in cuts for the 400 richest families in the first Senate version are middle class benefits?

Author:  pittmike [ Wed Jul 26, 2017 6:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

Regardless of what legislation you are talking about and what specific matter it involves wouldn't a repeal of anything appear as a cut always? This is why I say the health care in some form is here forever. It was given in the form of the ACA and is now going to be entrenched. Now if you try to repeal anything it is automatically a cut benefiting the rich etc.

The perspective could or should be nothing is getting cut. We are stopping a good idea done poorly and simply going back to the original way things were done. Lets try again.

It has been around eight years and was fully implemented less than that. It is not the same as proposing right now to end social security next year.

Author:  Baby McNown [ Wed Jul 26, 2017 6:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

pittmike wrote:
Regardless of what legislation you are talking about and what specific matter it involves wouldn't a repeal of anything appear as a cut always? This is why I say the health care in some form is here forever. It was given in the form of the ACA and is now going to be entrenched. Now if you try to repeal anything it is automatically a cut benefiting the rich etc.

The perspective could or should be nothing is getting cut. We are stopping a good idea done poorly and simply going back to the original way things were done. Lets try again.

It has been around eight years and was fully implemented less than that. It is not the same as proposing right now to end social security next year.

If you remove benefits form other people and give tax cuts to the rich, that's a cut benefiting the rich you ignorant gasbag.

Author:  pittmike [ Wed Jul 26, 2017 6:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

Baby McNown wrote:
pittmike wrote:
Regardless of what legislation you are talking about and what specific matter it involves wouldn't a repeal of anything appear as a cut always? This is why I say the health care in some form is here forever. It was given in the form of the ACA and is now going to be entrenched. Now if you try to repeal anything it is automatically a cut benefiting the rich etc.

The perspective could or should be nothing is getting cut. We are stopping a good idea done poorly and simply going back to the original way things were done. Lets try again.

It has been around eight years and was fully implemented less than that. It is not the same as proposing right now to end social security next year.

If you remove benefits form other people and give tax cuts to the rich, that's a cut benefiting the rich you ignorant gasbag.


Ok gasbag is a good one. You are very wise so explain to me how if one were inclined to repeal this and replace it with a better system how you could avoid a cut? Even if it were temporary or covered with language to ease it yes it has to be cut. And the tax benefit is a trick bag as the taxes were raised to implement the system they want to get rid of.

Oh the "this is a big fucking deal" catch 22 that is government benefit deals. Just get that fucking thing in and it will never be changed, removed or otherwise dealt with because you know... giving the rich cuts and benefits and killing poor people.

Author:  Baby McNown [ Wed Jul 26, 2017 7:00 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

pittmike wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
pittmike wrote:
Regardless of what legislation you are talking about and what specific matter it involves wouldn't a repeal of anything appear as a cut always? This is why I say the health care in some form is here forever. It was given in the form of the ACA and is now going to be entrenched. Now if you try to repeal anything it is automatically a cut benefiting the rich etc.

The perspective could or should be nothing is getting cut. We are stopping a good idea done poorly and simply going back to the original way things were done. Lets try again.

It has been around eight years and was fully implemented less than that. It is not the same as proposing right now to end social security next year.

If you remove benefits form other people and give tax cuts to the rich, that's a cut benefiting the rich you ignorant gasbag.


Ok gasbag is a good one. You are very wise so explain to me how if one were inclined to repeal this and replace it with a better system how you could avoid a cut? Even if it were temporary or covered with language to ease it yes it has to be cut. And the tax benefit is a trick bag as the taxes were raised to implement the system they want to get rid of.

Oh the "this is a big fucking deal" catch 22 that is government benefit deals. Just get that fucking thing in and it will never be changed, removed or otherwise dealt with because you know... giving the rich cuts and benefits and killing poor people.

Explain to me how a tax cut has any place in this bill.

Author:  pittmike [ Wed Jul 26, 2017 7:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

Baby McNown wrote:
pittmike wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
pittmike wrote:
Regardless of what legislation you are talking about and what specific matter it involves wouldn't a repeal of anything appear as a cut always? This is why I say the health care in some form is here forever. It was given in the form of the ACA and is now going to be entrenched. Now if you try to repeal anything it is automatically a cut benefiting the rich etc.

The perspective could or should be nothing is getting cut. We are stopping a good idea done poorly and simply going back to the original way things were done. Lets try again.

It has been around eight years and was fully implemented less than that. It is not the same as proposing right now to end social security next year.

If you remove benefits form other people and give tax cuts to the rich, that's a cut benefiting the rich you ignorant gasbag.


Ok gasbag is a good one. You are very wise so explain to me how if one were inclined to repeal this and replace it with a better system how you could avoid a cut? Even if it were temporary or covered with language to ease it yes it has to be cut. And the tax benefit is a trick bag as the taxes were raised to implement the system they want to get rid of.

Oh the "this is a big fucking deal" catch 22 that is government benefit deals. Just get that fucking thing in and it will never be changed, removed or otherwise dealt with because you know... giving the rich cuts and benefits and killing poor people.

Explain to me how a tax cut has any place in this bill.


You will have to be more specific. What exact cut and what version? The house one or the senate one that is not finished? In general, any cut of a tax initiated by the ACA is fair game to cut if you are on the repeal side.

Author:  pittmike [ Wed Jul 26, 2017 7:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

As I read this CNN article you can see it is not just a giveaway for the rich. It is, what is the word for it, complicated. Keep in mind this is CNN not Fox/Brebart.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/28/opinions/ ... index.html

"This criticism of the Republican bills is understandable but wrongheaded."

Author:  Brick [ Wed Jul 26, 2017 7:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Danny on the twitter muscle II

1) Create bill that raises taxes.
2) When someone wants to repeal it, complain that it is a tax cut even though it simply is getting rid of the taxes that only were raised because of the bill that was passed.

Concentrate on the idea that people will lose coverage(even in the flawed ways that many Democrats are doing it).

Imagine our dumb President and dumb Congress taxed income UNDER 100k at 95%, and then the Democrats came in in 2020 and repealed that. Would that also be a tax cut?

Page 22 of 68 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/