US Healthcare Law upheld in Supreme Court

[C-Fan]

Thoughts?

[Tsiangkun]

I've heard conservatives are upset and want to flee the country, but they are having difficulty finding another first world capitalist society that doesn't provide healthcare.

[Jeremy]

I'd like to take this time to welcome US social policy to the 20th century.

[Pasquar]

I'd like to take this time to welcome US social policy to the 20th century.

A small step..

[Pasquar]

I haven't been on in a while and can't find how to 'edit' or else I would have changed the above post

what I mean by that is that the Affordable Care Act, while a step in the right (or left, depending on somantics) direction, just doesn't cut it. I realize it will insure tens of millions of Americans who previously did not have healthcare before, but the notion of 'insurance' for healthcare bothers me itself. I know I'm on an ideological front right now, but the repeated attacks on the ACA by the right and the challenge to the Supreme Court make me pessemistic about further meaningful progressive legislation in the years to come on a battery of issues.

In a nutshell, I think it's great, but its certainly not universal healthcare. Public health should be a public good.

[Jeremy]

The 20th Century covers a pretty broad range of social reform though

I think the US will see a lot of progress on this issue to come though, when it becomes apparent that current law hasn't resulted in the implosion of the universe. I think that's where educated people can have hope for the future with these kinds of debates - one side is making predictions about the world which will be easily testable, probably even within the current election term. It doesn't really matter whether people believe the dire predictions now or not, what matters is if they still believe them in December.

Australia has just introduced a carbon tax, and it's a similar thing; the opposition has predicted the collapse of our economy. I have sent him a letter proposing a bet of 20 cans of soup on the issue, but on the assumption that he's wrong, by the time we have our next election (probably mid to late 2013), we should have a good idea whether it's actually going to bring us to collapse, or have almost no effect.

[rjadamson]

The House of Representatives has voted on repealing the Affordable Care Act more times than I can do consecutive butterflies/downs.

According to CBS News, the House has spent at least 80 hours or two full work weeks voting to repeal the law. The efforts have been supported en masse by the South Florida Republican delegation in Congress.

The Congressional Research Service stated that a work week in the House costs $24 million per week, which means the two weeks spent fruitlessly trying to repeal the ACA has cost taxpayers approximately $48 million.

Would anyone care to help me turn this into some sort of drinking game?

[BainbridgeShred]

Australia has just introduced a carbon tax, and it's a similar thing; the opposition has predicted the collapse of our economy. I have sent him a letter proposing a bet of 20 cans of soup on the issue, but on the assumption that he's wrong, by the time we have our next election (probably mid to late 2013), we should have a good idea whether it's actually going to bring us to collapse, or have almost no effect.

I still cannot believe you went for that

[Jeremy]

What amazes me is that you could be so incredibly wrong about the predictions you made prior to the bet, and still bring it up. Of course I never took you seriously, but spending less than 2 hours pay on cans of soup that are later eaten is not much of a cost to see your intellectual abilities so strongly humiliated.

[BainbridgeShred]

I don't think you follow me. 75% of the posts I've made on this forum were specifically to troll you. You are the quintessential whiny, know-it-all liberal who can't see when he's being made fun of and thus I really had no choice.

[BainbridgeShred]

I remember one particular instance where I got into what was (From your perspective) a serious argument on whether gays should be able to marry. My reason for why they shouldn't be able to was that they don't deserve the tax breaks that come from marriage because they can't reproduce.

..And you believed me. And argued with me for like 5 pages. Meanwhile I was about 15 years old while you were pushing 25. <3 Jer

[Jeremy]

Claiming to be a troll is convenient when you've been intellectually demolished. "I stated an opinion that turned out to be really stupid, but I didn't mean it."

Anyway I'm glad to see that you concede that I've been right, and the position you were arguing was wrong, regardless of your supposed intentions.