Andrew Sullivan article

Dungheap said:
This Congress isn't saying what a future Congress must do, it says what the law is. The Congress passed a law that does what it does. If a future Congress decides that it wants to change the law, that isn't a flaw with the Affordable Care Act.
Click to expand...

LMAO... yeah... you got me. Because if I write into a law that Medicare has to be cut by 99% in 2019, knowing full well that it will NEVER happen, it isn't a flaw on my part. It is a flaw on a future Congress because they couldn't figure out a way to make my ignorant promise happen. Yeah Dung... that makes sense.

So if I write a law that promises future payments of a million dollars a month for everyone, it isn't my law that is flawed? It is future Congress's who are flawed for not being able to find ways to pay for my promises? Is that what you are saying? That I can promise whatever I want and not be flawed for doing so because I am not the one that actually has to make it work?

I also think this whole line of argument is hilarious coming from someone who opposed raising the debt ceiling unless this Congress set limits on what future Congresses can spend. Not terribly consistent, SF.
Click to expand...

What IS consistent is your ability to create straw men. Where have I stated that this Congress set spending limits on future Congresses? Do show us one example of such, so that we are all on the same page.
 
Superfreak said:
LMAO... yeah... you got me. Because if I write into a law that Medicare has to be cut by 99% in 2019, knowing full well that it will NEVER happen, it isn't a flaw on my part. It is a flaw on a future Congress because they couldn't figure out a way to make my ignorant promise happen. Yeah Dung... that makes sense.

So if I write a law that promises future payments of a million dollars a month for everyone, it isn't my law that is flawed? It is future Congress's who are flawed for not being able to find ways to pay for my promises? Is that what you are saying? That I can promise whatever I want and not be flawed for doing so because I am not the one that actually has to make it work?
Click to expand...


No, those laws are stupid on the merits, not because future Congresses may change them. You criticism of the ACA is that future Congresses may change them, not that the merits are bad.



Superfreak said:
What IS consistent is your ability to create straw men. Where have I stated that this Congress set spending limits on future Congresses? Do show us one example of such, so that we are all on the same page.
Click to expand...

You're really going to force me to dig through the debt ceiling thread? You won't own up to your personal view that the debt ceiling should not be raised absent agreements on spending cuts in the future?
 
Dungheap said:
No, those laws are stupid on the merits, not because future Congresses may change them. You criticism of the ACA is that future Congresses may change them, not that the merits are bad.
Click to expand...

No moron, I am criticizing Obama care because the projections are based on unrealistic measures. They are NOT going to cut Medicare payments to doctors, they have proven that time and again. Yet they rely on that and other unrealistic measures in order to project that the bill will 'reduce' the deficit. It is just short of being a lie. It is complete deception. They and every realistic person out there knows that it isn't going to happen. Only brain dead parrots like you actually believe that Obamacare will ACTUALLY reduce the deficit.

You're really going to force me to dig through the debt ceiling thread? You won't own up to your personal view that the debt ceiling should not be raised absent agreements on spending cuts in the future?
Click to expand...

Yes. Go find what it is you are referring to and post us a link.
 
Superfreak said:
No moron, I am criticizing Obama care because the projections are based on unrealistic measures. They are NOT going to cut Medicare payments to doctors, they have proven that time and again. Yet they rely on that and other unrealistic measures in order to project that the bill will 'reduce' the deficit. It is just short of being a lie. It is complete deception. They and every realistic person out there knows that it isn't going to happen. Only brain dead parrots like you actually believe that Obamacare will ACTUALLY reduce the deficit.
Click to expand...


Whether the Medicare doc fix happens or not is a separate issue from the impact of the Affordable Care Act.


Superfreak said:
Yes. Go find what it is you are referring to and post us a link.
Click to expand...

And if I do it, I get to pick your avatar and your signature for a month and if I can't do it, you get to pick mine. Deal?
 
For SF:

Superfreak said:
It has everything to do with past AND future expenditures you dolt. As I stated earlier... you can vote yes to raising the debt limit AND enacting future spending cuts AT THE SAME TIME.... THAT is the only responsible thing to do. Raising the debt ceiling without a long term plan to lower our nations debt is truly moronic.
Click to expand...


Let the spinning begin . . .
 
Dungheap said:
Whether the Medicare doc fix happens or not is a separate issue from the impact of the Affordable Care Act.
Click to expand...

How is it a separate issue? Correct me if I am wrong, but the cuts to Medicare payments to doctors is part of what makes Obamacare 'reduce' the deficit.

And if I do it, I get to pick your avatar and your signature for a month and if I can't do it, you get to pick mine. Deal?
Click to expand...

I have all avatars and sigs blocked... wasn't even aware I still had a sig.
 
As for your quote... yes, I am suggesting the opposite. While it is a different situation, you are correct on the fact that both are requiring future Congresses to act in a set manner with votes/actions on the issue.

That said... In the two cases

1) Your claim that Obamacare reduces the deficit is dependent on future Congresses doing what this bill says. Yet it is not a possibility... because it is not an economic reality. They CAN'T do what Obamacare is proposing.

2) My claim that they should have enacted future spending restrictions to prevent ongoing deficit spending while discussing the debt limit is one that CAN be done and IS economically viable.

So I will give you the point that my positions are different in terms of requiring something of future Congresses, mine is feasible, yours is not. There is a difference in my opinion due to the circumstances. Telling someone they have to do something that they can't possibly do is quite different than telling them they have to do something that they can do (but just may not WANT to do).
 
Superfreak said:
As for your quote... yes, I am suggesting the opposite. While it is a different situation, you are correct on the fact that both are requiring future Congresses to act in a set manner with votes/actions on the issue.

That said... In the two cases

1) Your claim that Obamacare reduces the deficit is dependent on future Congresses doing what this bill says. Yet it is not a possibility... because it is not an economic reality. They CAN'T do what Obamacare is proposing.

2) My claim that they should have enacted future spending restrictions to prevent ongoing deficit spending while discussing the debt limit is one that CAN be done and IS economically viable.

So I will give you the point that my positions are different in terms of requiring something of future Congresses, mine is feasible, yours is not. There is a difference in my opinion due to the circumstances. Telling someone they have to do something that they can't possibly do is quite different than telling them they have to do something that they can do (but just may not WANT to do).
Click to expand...


You're basically saying that stiffing doctors isn't feasible, but stiffing poor people is feasible. I disagree, although I appreciate your point that it is impossible to tell future Congresses what to do. If it were possible, the debt picture would be just fine.


Edit: I will also add that the ACA doesn't require future Congresses to do anything. Congress certainly can do nothing. The present Congress is quite good at it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top