Again, what he WANTS and what he can actually get through the Congress are not one in the same so its useless to speculate on something that Congress will not pass.

 

What quote do you refer to?

 

When he says if he would go w/ a single payer system if they could start over. It's a little over a minute into the video I believe. He says a lot of stuff and does the opposite. How do you know 7 years from now it won't get to that point? There's no way I can fool myself into believing that their goal isn't to make it hard or impossible for companies to give the same insurance benefits we get now.

Again, what he WANTS and what he can actually get through the Congress are not one in the same so its useless to speculate on something that Congress will not pass.

 

What quote do you refer to?

 

Could this current plan, if passed and implemented for an unknown time, make it easier to get a single payer system passed at some point in the future?

Could this current plan, if passed and implemented for an unknown time, make it easier to get a single payer system passed at some point in the future?

 

Which of the 5 "current plans" do you speak of?

 

What assumptions are you making that would be in the final piece of legislation?

When he says if he would go w/ a single payer system if they could start over. It's a little over a minute into the video I believe. He says a lot of stuff and does the opposite. How do you know 7 years from now it won't get to that point? There's no way I can fool myself into believing that their goal isn't to make it hard or impossible for companies to give the same insurance benefits we get now.

 

 

You do realize that most of the country opposes single payer, correct? You do realize that the people who would have to be involved in getting us to the point of singler payer total , at least, 535 elected officials, correct?

Which of the 5 "current plans" do you speak of?

 

What assumptions are you making that would be in the final piece of legislation?

 

None, really. I'm just asking questions.

 

Can you, or anyone else, suggest any good sites that break the package down? Or is there no one on planet earth that actually knows what we're getting?

None, really. I'm just asking questions.

 

Can you, or anyone else, suggest any good sites that break the package down? Or is there no one on planet earth that actually knows what we're getting?

 

I saw something today that said there are 3 plans being floated in Congress and 2 in the Senate. Each body will have to come up with their own and forward it on. Congress and Senate would then have to negotiate with each other to come up with one final bill that would go the President.

 

I don't know at what point those become public.

You do realize that most of the country opposes single payer, correct? You do realize that the people who would have to be involved in getting us to the point of singler payer total , at least, 535 elected officials, correct?

So let me get this straight. If a politician says something at one point in the past, so long as it does not seem to affect their policies because of the fact that at least 535 elected officials would have to agree, and it is unpopular, then it is not a valid point? So, if Sarah Palin attended a church with a witch doctor discussing hunting witches at some point, it would be a completely irrelevant point to bring up due to the fact that it is unpopular and at least 535 elected officials would have to come together for it to become a reality?

So let me get this straight. If a politician says something at one point in the past, so long as it does not seem to affect their policies because of the fact that at least 535 elected officials would have to agree, and it is unpopular, then it is not a valid point? So, if Sarah Palin attended a church with a witch doctor discussing hunting witches at some point, it would be a completely irrelevant point to bring up due to the fact that it is unpopular and at least 535 elected officials would have to come together for it to become a reality?

 

 

You can bring it up all you want (in either example) but its for discussion only. He's the President - not the King. (Insert favorite joke here.)

 

Lets say, God forbid, Palin becomes President. (Let me pause here to shake that thought out of my head).

 

She wants to do "religion reform." Someone on here says "you know what she really wants is to get all churches to have witch doctors."

 

Waste of typing effort. It would never pass by the 535 elected officials just like single payer will never pass.

You can bring it up all you want (in either example) but its for discussion only. He's the President - not the King. (Insert favorite joke here.)

 

Lets say, God forbid, Palin becomes President. (Let me pause here to shake that thought out of my head).

 

She wants to do "religion reform." Someone on here says "you know what she really wants is to get all churches to have witch doctors."

 

Waste of typing effort. It would never pass by the 535 elected officials just like single payer will never pass.

 

But, I think it's fair to be concerned with the plan he/she can get passed, if you think it will ultimately lead to what is desired, whether it be a single payer system or witch doctors in every church. :lol:

You can bring it up all you want (in either example) but its for discussion only. He's the President - not the King. (Insert favorite joke here.)

 

Lets say, God forbid, Palin becomes President. (Let me pause here to shake that thought out of my head).

 

She wants to do "religion reform." Someone on here says "you know what she really wants is to get all churches to have witch doctors."

 

Waste of typing effort. It would never pass by the 535 elected officials just like single payer will never pass.

Absolutely it is a waste of typing effort. Yet you criticize others for bringing up President Obama's single-payer comment from years ago, but have talked about Palin's witch comment.

But, I think it's fair to be concerned with the plan he/she can get passed, if you think it will ultimately lead to what is desired, whether it be a single payer system or witch doctors in every church. :lol:

 

Fine. I don't waste mental space worrying about something that can't get passed. Its hard enough keeping up with legitimate concerns.

Absolutely it is a waste of typing effort. Yet you criticize others for bringing up President Obama's single-payer comment from years ago, but have talked about Palin's witch comment.

 

Bring up his comment all you want in the form of his philosophy and his mental status. Bring up Palin's wacky witch doctor. That's fine for discussing the person. Its fine for talking "about" the person and their beliefs.

 

However, again, when discussing potential outcomes of a particular piece of legislation and using something that simply has zero chance of ever coming to fruition (single payer/witch doctors in every church) is a waste of time.

 

You see the difference?

Bring up his comment all you want in the form of his philosophy and his mental status. Bring up Palin's wacky witch doctor. That's fine for discussing the person. Its fine for talking "about" the person and their beliefs.

 

However, again, when discussing potential outcomes of a particular piece of legislation and using something that simply has zero chance of ever coming to fruition (single payer/witch doctors in every church) is a waste of time.

 

You see the difference?

 

Yes I see the difference. And considering how maybe a handful of posters on this site know which specific pieces of legislation are around (which is embarrassing), I'd venture to say that comments on this site are speaking not about specific legislation, but rather President Obama's "philosophy and his mental status" about healthcare reform.

 

Maybe I'm missing your point. I hate the talking points more than anyone, but it seems like a Stossel video (which, while I haven't watched, I'm sure is substance-filled) would be more relevant than most things we hear.

 

Maybe I'm missing your point. I hate the talking points more than anyone, but it seems like a Stossel video (which, while I haven't watched, I'm sure is substance-filled) would be more relevant than most things we hear.

 

I'll summarize. It showed a bunch of Canadians and talked about the problems in Canada. How is that relevant?

Fine. I don't waste mental space worrying about something that can't get passed. Its hard enough keeping up with legitimate concerns.

 

I don't worry about any of it, whether I like it or not.