Skip to main content

The master plan of the RepubTEACons is to end Medicare. Right Now. Ryan repeatedly criticized the ACA for what he claimed would be cuts of "hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicare". Has anyone told Ryan that old folks are the most fickle voting demographic and his plan will guarantee his loss in his next election?
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
The master plan of the RepubTEACons is to end Medicare. Right Now. Ryan repeatedly criticized the ACA for what he claimed would be cuts of "hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicare". Has anyone told Ryan that old folks are the most fickle voting demographic and his plan will guarantee his loss in his next election?


Based on what you read on here Ditto, I am not so sure.
I think a lot of these most die hard of rethugliteacons are one step away from toe up, yet seem to go along with whatever they are TOLD to believe.
I thought "gullibility" was supposed to be for the young?
Look how they "goose stepped" on Medicare Part D!
Sad, of course my generation isn't even considering SS or medicare as viable options.
But I will fight for it for my NANA!
Guys, this is where you and I part ways. I do not believe in spending more than is taken in. We need unilateral cuts across the board in every area of the government, including so called defense.
There is no way at this point to balance the budget without pain. We have to raise taxes on the upper 3%, and institute tarriffs to force companies to come back to this country for maNUFACTURING so we can have viable jobs for the people who will be losing some sort of government help.
It's a complicated problem and requires complicated solutions.
quote:
Originally posted by 73RangerXLT:
Guys, this is where you and I part ways. I do not believe in spending more than is taken in. We need unilateral cuts across the board in every area of the government, including so called defense.
There is no way at this point to balance the budget without pain. We have to raise taxes on the upper 3%, and institute tarriffs to force companies to come back to this country for maNUFACTURING so we can have viable jobs for the people who will be losing some sort of government help.
It's a complicated problem and requires complicated solutions.


At least your a thinking Democrat (if I'm wrong about you being a Democrat, please foregive me.)

I hope those who keep up the silly name calling realise, it doesn't reflect well on you.
Rocky I'll admitt I read another one of your posts. What you said about both Obama and Bush and your view. I see you are not rank and file and stick to your guns. I admire that.

Keep Marching,
Skippy
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
The master plan of the RepubTEACons is to end Medicare. Right Now.


Not quite.

quote:
Mr. Ryan's proposal would apply to those currently under the age of 55, and for those Americans would convert Medicare into a "premium support" system. Participants from that group would choose from an array of private insurance plans when they reach 65 and become eligible, and the government would pay about the first $15,000 in premiums. Those who are poorer or less healthy would receive bigger payments than others.


Facts suck don't they?
quote:
Originally posted by 73RangerXLT:
Guys, this is where you and I part ways. I do not believe in spending more than is taken in. We need unilateral cuts across the board in every area of the government, including so called defense.
There is no way at this point to balance the budget without pain. We have to raise taxes on the upper 3%, and institute tarriffs to force companies to come back to this country for maNUFACTURING so we can have viable jobs for the people who will be losing some sort of government help.
It's a complicated problem and requires complicated solutions.


Tax gun ownership, $100 per gun per year ought to get us out of the hole.
quote:
Originally posted by skippy delepepper:
quote:
Originally posted by 73RangerXLT:
Guys, this is where you and I part ways. I do not believe in spending more than is taken in. We need unilateral cuts across the board in every area of the government, including so called defense.
There is no way at this point to balance the budget without pain. We have to raise taxes on the upper 3%, and institute tarriffs to force companies to come back to this country for maNUFACTURING so we can have viable jobs for the people who will be losing some sort of government help.
It's a complicated problem and requires complicated solutions.


At least your a thinking Democrat (if I'm wrong about you being a Democrat, please foregive me.)

I hope those who keep up the silly name calling realise, it doesn't reflect well on you.
Rocky I'll admitt I read another one of your posts. What you said about both Obama and Bush and your view. I see you are not rank and file and stick to your guns. I admire that.

Keep Marching,
Skippy


Don't be confused into thinking that anyone is waiting in line for your approval. You're not exactly an upper tier contributor.
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by 73RangerXLT:
Guys, this is where you and I part ways. I do not believe in spending more than is taken in. We need unilateral cuts across the board in every area of the government, including so called defense.
There is no way at this point to balance the budget without pain. We have to raise taxes on the upper 3%, and institute tarriffs to force companies to come back to this country for maNUFACTURING so we can have viable jobs for the people who will be losing some sort of government help.
It's a complicated problem and requires complicated solutions.


Tax gun ownership, $100 per gun per year ought to get us out of the hole.


But I thought you hated guns? Now you are basing your plan on buying more guns. Like Obama basing SCHIPS on cigarette money while telling people to quit.
quote:
Originally posted by b50m:
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by 73RangerXLT:
Guys, this is where you and I part ways. I do not believe in spending more than is taken in. We need unilateral cuts across the board in every area of the government, including so called defense.
There is no way at this point to balance the budget without pain. We have to raise taxes on the upper 3%, and institute tarriffs to force companies to come back to this country for maNUFACTURING so we can have viable jobs for the people who will be losing some sort of government help.
It's a complicated problem and requires complicated solutions.


Tax gun ownership, $100 per gun per year ought to get us out of the hole.


But I thought you hated guns? Now you are basing your plan on buying more guns. Like Obama basing SCHIPS on cigarette money while telling people to quit.



I hate you too, but if people were willing to pay a tax to read your crap, you might add a little value to life in America.
quote:
Originally posted by b50m:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
The master plan of the RepubTEACons is to end Medicare. Right Now.


Not quite.

quote:
Mr. Ryan's proposal would apply to those currently under the age of 55, and for those Americans would convert Medicare into a "premium support" system. Participants from that group would choose from an array of private insurance plans when they reach 65 and become eligible, and the government would pay about the first $15,000 in premiums. Those who are poorer or less healthy would receive bigger payments than others.


Facts suck don't they?


Thats not Medicare, and thats a fact. Whether or not it sucks is your problem.


The Ryan Plan is something new. Old people dont like change. Old people will vote against the RepubTEACons.
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
quote:
Originally posted by b50m:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
The master plan of the RepubTEACons is to end Medicare. Right Now.


Not quite.

quote:
Mr. Ryan's proposal would apply to those currently under the age of 55, and for those Americans would convert Medicare into a "premium support" system. Participants from that group would choose from an array of private insurance plans when they reach 65 and become eligible, and the government would pay about the first $15,000 in premiums. Those who are poorer or less healthy would receive bigger payments than others.


Facts suck don't they?


Thats not Medicare, and thats a fact. Whether or not it sucks is your problem.


The Ryan Plan is something new. Old people dont like change. Old people will vote against the RepubTEACons.


News flash ditto, I'm one of those OLD PEOPLE! And I like the idea. Medicare and all the other programs won't last. It's better to get something at a lower rate than nothing.
I'm approaching old age and approve of the program, so far. Obama appointed a debt commission. Then, thanked them for their work and ignored it.

The stark truth is that cuts must be made. Some addition revenue, as well. Both Ryan's plan and the debt commission had revenue increases.

We only have to look at the EU, with their social democrat governments, and see the train wreck awaiting us, if we don't.
Are Republicans for or against cuts in Medicare? Do they care if cuts in Medicare hurt seniors or not? Pinning the Republicans down on this question looks to be about as hard as chasing the feather in the movie Forrest Gump would be.

Deficit Plays Into Health Reform
Friday, August 14, 2009:

With polls showing rising concern over the government's grim financial situation, key Republicans and a growing number of Democrats say it will be hard to push an ambitious health reform bill through Congress unless it reduces projected federal spending on medical care and begins to bring the national debt under control.

Meanwhile, some Republicans are attacking the very notion of reining in out-of-control Medicare spending, charging that efforts to force hospitals and other providers to become more efficient would lead to "fewer choices and lower health-care quality for our nation's seniors," as House Republican Leader John A. Boehner (Ohio) put it this week.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01712.html

Will Health Reform Cut Medicare Benefits?
AUG 31 2009, 5:26 PM ET

Democrats say they'll slash spending from Medicare without reducing benefits, trimming wasteful spending from the program without reducing seniors' coverage. Republicans say President Obama's Medicare spending cuts would hurt seniors (in fact, the National Republican Congressional Committee just launched ads against three House Democrats today alleging that the projected Medicare spending cuts--projected at $500 billion by sources with knowledge of Senate Finance Committee talks--would pay for health care reform "on the backs of America's senior citizens.") AARP agrees with the Democrats. Who is right?

I asked the NRCC why they say Medicare cuts will put seniors' health coverage at risk; they pointed me to PolitiFact.com, which gives Obama a "half true" on his claim that "we're not talking about cutting Medicare benefits."

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... its/24171/

2009: Against health care reform; For seniors and Medicare.

But here we have an entirely different story.

2011: For cutting the deficit; Against seniors and Medicare.

G.O.P. Blueprint Would Remake Health Policy
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: April 4, 2011

WASHINGTON — The proposal to be unveiled by House Republicans on Tuesday to rein in the long-term costs of Medicaid and Medicare represents a fundamental rethinking of how the two programs work, an ambitious effort by conservatives to address the nation’s fiscal challenges, and a huge political risk.

House Republican aides said the budget blueprint to be issued by the chairman of the Budget Committee, Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, would slice more than $5 trillion from projected federal spending in the coming decade.

Mr. Ryan and fellow House Republicans are wading into tricky waters, where many other politicians have run aground.

But with the nation’s fiscal problems looming larger, Republicans say the politics of the issue have shifted. They expect to receive credit from the public for trying to hold down the deficit and the debt.

“We have a moral obligation to the country to do this,” Mr. Ryan said in an interview last week.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/05/healt ... s&emc=tha2

I guess Republicans are now "for cuts in Medicare after being against it!" Republicans such as John Boehner like to say they are just "carrying out the will of the American people." But are they really?

WASHINGTON— Less than a quarter of Americans support making significant cuts to Social Security or Medicare to tackle the country's mounting deficit, according to a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, illustrating the challenge facing lawmakers who want voter buy-in to alter entitlement programs.

In the poll, Americans across all age groups and ideologies said by large margins that it was "unacceptable'' to make significant cuts in entitlement programs in order to reduce the federal deficit. Even tea party supporters, by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, declared significant cuts to Social Security "unacceptable."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... TopStories
"People over 55 have spent their working lives in the expectation that the government would fund Medicare at a certain level, and Ryan would keep that implicit promise. People under that age would get a new deal. When they retire, they would be allowed to choose among health-care plans, with the government pitching in to help them make their premiums. No longer would the federal government attempt to micromanage the price of medical services; no longer would it encourage providers to perform more procedures regardless of patient outcomes.

The Ryan budget fixes the budgetary incentives in Medicaid, too. At the moment, the power to make funding promises is divorced from the responsibility to pay for them: The states set eligibility and benefit levels, and the federal government foots half the bill. Republicans would instead give the states a fixed amount of money to spend on the medical needs of the poor. By itself this reform would not make Medicaid a less crummy program for its beneficiaries. (The program’s patient outcomes are indistinguishable from those of people with no insurance at all.) But it would at least enable state-level reforms and stop the fiscal bleeding."

http://www.nationalreview.com/...dget-visions-editors
quote:
Originally posted by Winston Niles Rumfoord:
quote:
Originally posted by The Propagandist:
Are Republicans for or against cuts in Medicare.....

I regret to inform you people of the TDF that you are beset with another socialist from the TNF forum.


He was doing "mission work" but although this screwed up server is STILL showing he is here, unfortunately Mr Propagandist has left the building. He just made a post on TNF. Go back down to TNF and say that, I dare you (you are such a wimp down there and suddenly such a right wing bad*ss up here!) Man, you are pathetic Winston Lights Runnoff!!!!!!!!!!! Razzer
What the Republicans are looking to do is to privatize everything. There will be nothing you do that will not have a price attached to it and make money for somebody.

Those block grants they keep talking about to pay for Medicare? You will get a certain amount to buy your own health insurance coverage, from an insurance company that is out to make a profit, and the way they do that is 1) decrease coverage, and 2) raise premiums.

That would be the first step to getting rid of it entirely so everything will be market-based for profit.

For neoliberals it is not sufficient that there is a market: there must be nothing which is not market.
Neoliberalism: Origins, theory, definition.

Some well-known Neo-liberals are Ayn Rand, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Dick Cheney and George W. Bush.
List of neo-liberals
quote:
Originally posted by Winston Niles Rumfoord:
quote:
Originally posted by The Propagandist:
Are Republicans for or against cuts in Medicare.....

I regret to inform you people of the TDF that you are beset with another socialist from the TNF forum.


The root word of "socialist" is "social." Are you trying to be anti-social? Psychiatrists have a few names to describe their patients when diagnosing people like that.
quote:
Originally posted by The Propagandist:
What the Republicans are looking to do is to privatize everything. There will be nothing you do that will not have a price attached to it and make money for somebody.

Those block grants they keep talking about to pay for Medicare? You will get a certain amount to buy your own health insurance coverage, from an insurance company that is out to make a profit, and the way they do that is 1) decrease coverage, and 2) raise premiums.

That would be the first step to getting rid of it entirely so everything will be market-based for profit.

For neoliberals it is not sufficient that there is a market: there must be nothing which is not market.
Neoliberalism: Origins, theory, definition.

Some well-known Neo-liberals are Ayn Rand, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Dick Cheney and George W. Bush.
List of neo-liberals


Allowing competition across state lines is one step. Most products are improved by competition. Whereas, if only the dead hand of government is allowed to dictate, the product does not improve. Costs just increase.
quote:
Originally posted by The Propagandist:
What the Republicans are looking to do is to privatize everything. There will be nothing you do that will not have a price attached to it and make money for somebody.

Those block grants they keep talking about to pay for Medicare? You will get a certain amount to buy your own health insurance coverage, from an insurance company that is out to make a profit, and the way they do that is 1) decrease coverage, and 2) raise premiums.

That would be the first step to getting rid of it entirely so everything will be market-based for profit.

For neoliberals it is not sufficient that there is a market: there must be nothing which is not market.
Neoliberalism: Origins, theory, definition.

Some well-known Neo-liberals are Ayn Rand, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Dick Cheney and George W. Bush.
List of neo-liberals


Cutting and pasting from a notorious left wing, anti-Semitic website is not overly convincing.
quote:
Originally posted by The Propagandist:
quote:
Originally posted by Winston Niles Rumfoord:
quote:
Originally posted by The Propagandist:
Are Republicans for or against cuts in Medicare.....

I regret to inform you people of the TDF that you are beset with another socialist from the TNF forum.



Yes, they call them some of the finest scientists, composers and artists in the world.
The root word of "socialist" is "social." Are you trying to be anti-social? Psychiatrists have a few names to describe their patients when diagnosing people like that.
quote:
Originally posted by The Propagandist:
What the Republicans are looking to do is to privatize everything. There will be nothing you do that will not have a price attached to it and make money for somebody.

Those block grants they keep talking about to pay for Medicare? You will get a certain amount to buy your own health insurance coverage, from an insurance company that is out to make a profit, and the way they do that is 1) decrease coverage, and 2) raise premiums.

That would be the first step to getting rid of it entirely so everything will be market-based for profit.


If you can't buy your own insurance for 15 grand a year, you ain't trying.
quote:
Originally posted by elinterventor01:
"People over 55 have spent their working lives in the expectation that the government would fund Medicare at a certain level, and Ryan would keep that implicit promise. People under that age would get a new deal. When they retire, they would be allowed to choose among health-care plans, with the government pitching in to help them make their premiums. No longer would the federal government attempt to micromanage the price of medical services; no longer would it encourage providers to perform more procedures regardless of patient outcomes.

The Ryan budget fixes the budgetary incentives in Medicaid, too. At the moment, the power to make funding promises is divorced from the responsibility to pay for them: The states set eligibility and benefit levels, and the federal government foots half the bill. Republicans would instead give the states a fixed amount of money to spend on the medical needs of the poor. By itself this reform would not make Medicaid a less crummy program for its beneficiaries. (The program’s patient outcomes are indistinguishable from those of people with no insurance at all.) But it would at least enable state-level reforms and stop the fiscal bleeding."

http://www.nationalreview.com/...dget-visions-editors


check around and see how many insurance companies are willing to accept you as a "customer" at 65 for some small "voucher".
quote:
Originally posted by The Propagandist:
What the Republicans are looking to do is to privatize everything. There will be nothing you do that will not have a price attached to it and make money for somebody.

Those block grants they keep talking about to pay for Medicare? You will get a certain amount to buy your own health insurance coverage, from an insurance company that is out to make a profit, and the way they do that is 1) decrease coverage, and 2) raise premiums.

That would be the first step to getting rid of it entirely so everything will be market-based for profit.

For neoliberals it is not sufficient that there is a market: there must be nothing which is not market.
Neoliberalism: Origins, theory, definition.

Some well-known Neo-liberals are Ayn Rand, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Dick Cheney and George W. Bush.
List of neo-liberals

I see you have located to forum of right-wing-nuts.
Welcome
Excelman
quote:
Originally posted by seeweed:
check around and see how many insurance companies are willing to accept you as a "customer" at 65 for some small "voucher".


Small?

and the government would pay about the first $15,000 in premiums. Those who are poorer or less healthy would receive bigger payments than others.
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
quote:
Originally posted by b50m:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
The master plan of the RepubTEACons is to end Medicare. Right Now.


Not quite.

quote:
Mr. Ryan's proposal would apply to those currently under the age of 55, and for those Americans would convert Medicare into a "premium support" system. Participants from that group would choose from an array of private insurance plans when they reach 65 and become eligible, and the government would pay about the first $15,000 in premiums. Those who are poorer or less healthy would receive bigger payments than others.


Facts suck don't they?


Thats not Medicare, and thats a fact. Whether or not it sucks is your problem.


The Ryan Plan is something new. Old people dont like change. Old people will vote against the RepubTEACons.


Sorry juan, old people realize we can't keep spending like we are.
quote:
Originally posted by Winston Niles Rumfoord:
quote:
Originally posted by The Propagandist:
Are Republicans for or against cuts in Medicare.....

I regret to inform you people of the TDF that you are beset with another socialist from the TNF forum.


It took all of one post to figure that one out. He'll be just as easy to ignore as the rest.
Republican legislators are constantly looking for ways to cut government expenditures on social policies and regulatory programs, and they claim that the American public is with them on this. But polls show that there is in fact very little public demand that we cut back on government spending. When asked about specific government programs, large majorities of Americans repeatedly say they don’t want spending cuts, and they often support increased spending in these policy areas.

But what about taxes? We all know that everyone hates government taxes, right? Aren’t conservatives right about that? Not necessarily. Again it depends on how you ask people about their taxes. If you ask them whether their federal income taxes are too high, 50% naturally say “yes.” But if the questions about taxes include a reference to what people get for paying their taxes, their answers suddenly become much more positive. 84% of Americans say that they “don’t mind paying taxes because my taxes contribute to making sure we have public schools, clean streets, public safety and a national defense, and a cleaner environment.”9 More importantly, 80% would rather maintain spending levels on domestic programs such as education, healthcare, and Social Security rather than lower taxes.

Many Americans also acknowledge that it is their responsibility as a citizen to pay the taxes that support their government. 81% say they agree that they “don’t mind paying taxes because my taxes are part of my contribution to society as a citizen of the United States.” This is a pretty extraordinary statement. Not only do most Americans appreciate that taxes are necessary to provide the many vital government services that they all enjoy, they also don’t resent paying them. They clearly understand what Franklin Delano Roosevelt meant when he said: “Taxes, after all, are dues that we pay for the privileges of membership in an organized society.” So much for the conservative contention that Americans hate taxes and are rabid about cutting them back.

http://www.governmentisgood.com/feature.php?fid=3

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×