Notice how Buffet emphasizes the problem of "COSTS" of healthcare?

I'll be fucking-go-to-hell...



http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/warren-buffett-scrap-obamacare-and-start-over_756302.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter


You know things are bad for President Obama when even Warren Buffett has soured on Obamacare and says that "we need something else." Money Morning writes:

Buffett and Obama


"Healthcare costs in the United States are like a tapeworm eating at our economic body.

"Those words come from famed investor Warren Buffett, who said he would scrap Obamacare and start all over.

"'We have a health system that, in terms of costs, is really out of control,' he added. 'And if you take this line and you project what has been happening into the future, we will get less and less competitive. So we need something else.'

"Buffett insists that without changes to Obamacare average citizens will suffer.

"'What we have now is untenable over time,' said Buffett, an early supporter of President Obama. 'That kind of a cost compared to the rest of the world is really like a tapeworm eating, you know, at our economic body.'

"Buffett does not believe that providing insurance for everyone is the first step to take in correcting our nation's healthcare system.

"'Attack the costs first, and then worry about expanding coverage,' he said. 'I would much rather see another plan that really attacks costs. And I think that's what the American public wants to see. I mean, the American public is not behind this bill.'"

Republicans should take Buffett's words as an invitation to propose a long-overdue Obamacare alternative, one that would lower costs, fix the unfairness in the tax code, deal with the specific problem of preexisting conditions, breathe life into a moribund individual insurance market, and constitute real reform. It's time to delay Obamacare and propose an alternative, then repeal Obamacare (in 2017) and pass the alternative.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

Go after the stupid idiots who sue the hospital non stop all the time.

Freeze all hospital costs. fire the person who authorised the price increase of sippy paper cups to be priced at $500.00 and ban them from working with the healthy industry as a whole.


Then when they are sued and can not pay the fines then close the hospital down and name the person responsible for the suit.

Also fire the doctors and ban them from the health industry if they leave tools inside the patients.

No simple emergency room visit should cost $800.00 Unless you are truly dying and close to death.

Pay it foward is another way to keep health care costs down.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/video-1036544/The-Thai-mobile-advert-weeping.html

Of course, he doesn't say "scrap Obamacare and start over" at all.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmDflUJ6OzE

goafter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Go after the stupid idiots who sue the hospital
> non stop all the time.
>
> Freeze all hospital costs. fire the person who
> authorised the price increase of sippy paper cups
> to be priced at $500.00 and ban them from working
> with the healthy industry as a whole.
>
>
> Then when they are sued and can not pay the fines
> then close the hospital down and name the person
> responsible for the suit.
>
> Also fire the doctors and ban them from the health
> industry if they leave tools inside the patients.
>
> No simple emergency room visit should cost $800.00
> Unless you are truly dying and close to death.


Part of the problem: Medicare and Medicaid.

Because these programs exist, and because the government(taxpayer) will reimburse cost of procedure and supplies, there is a disincentive to keep costs down. Because people have little respect for the government, they are hardly concerned about bloated charges. As long as they can send the bill to someone else, who really cares.

The attitude is the same in food and utilities. If you go to lunch, you may be thinking chicken sandwich. If your boss is paying, the prime rib is more likely to come to mind. If you pay your own electric bill, you are more likely to turn the lights out. If utilities are "free" chances are you'll pop open the windows on a Winter day and leave the TV on and not give a single fuck.

But if you propose streamlining these welfare programs, the Democrats accuse you of wanting to kill seniors and being cruel.

The problem with the scrap it and start over approach is that once the program is scrapped nothing will get done...and we'll simply end up exchanging the mess that is Obamacare for the mess that existed before Obamacare. Meaningful reform requires taking on certain powerful blocks that have strong interests in the status quo, rather than trying to accommodate them.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The problem with the scrap it and start over
> approach is that once the program is scrapped
> nothing will get done...and we'll simply end up
> exchanging the mess that is Obamacare for the mess
> that existed before Obamacare. Meaningful reform
> requires taking on certain powerful blocks that
> have strong interests in the status quo, rather
> than trying to accommodate them.


All Obamacare has been is accommodating them. The insurance companies love it, Unions are pushing for exemptions in exchange for their support, Congress though it was so great they excluded themselves and their staff from it ect.

Its such a mess that its 10 times harder to try and patch together and fix then it is to just start fresh. Its the same reason you would tear a building down and start over instead of spending years more rebuilding it piece by piece.

They know its a disaster too hence they keep pushing back its implementation until after important elections from the problem it will cause. The old system was without a doubt better. It would literally be cheaper to just buy people private plans.

If Obama was actually willing to compromise something could get done or some reforms could be made. He wasnt and isnt though. He shut out the GOP from day one and got Reid and Pelosi to hammer it through buying off votes when they needed too. As long as his idea of compromise is everyone agreeing with what he says nothing will get done, in this case though its not a bad thing to go back to how it was.

The status quo, as flawed and fucked as it is, is preferable to allowing government criminals more power over my healthcare.


You are a blithering subservient moron if you believe they can do it fairly, efficiently or without corruption.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The status quo, as flawed and fucked as it is, is
> preferable to allowing government criminals more
> power over my healthcare.
>
>
> You are a blithering subservient moron if you
> believe they can do it fairly, efficiently or
> without corruption.


yeah right, as if those idiot teabagger morons are gonna do anything but whine and be disruptive when it comes to the issue.

If you do nothing fucking pukes had a shred of shame you wouldn't have posted this quote of his in the topic with a straight face you hypocrites -"Healthcare costs in the United States are like a tapeworm eating at our economic body."

gerry1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you do nothing fucking pukes had a shred of
> shame you wouldn't have posted this quote of his
> in the topic with a straight face you hypocrites
> -"Healthcare costs in the United States are like a
> tapeworm eating at our economic body."


Sorry, you'll have to talk to your Obama-supporting pal Warren about that one.

He said it, not us.

Although we do appreciate your typical liberal tendency to try to squelch anything which does not support the official party line and talking points.

Hospital costs are expensive because of the unpaid bills from deadbeats and illegals. They have to recoup the loss somehow. Need a first hand look go to the ER in Fairfax Hospital and see for yourself. The hospitals must treat them they cannot be refused.

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The status quo, as flawed and fucked as it is, is
> preferable

Only if you work in a government job that provides health insurance, if you are middle or upper income level in a large company, if you are retired and covered by medicare or through a similar retirement arrangement, or if you get coverage through a family member who falls into one of these groups. If you don't, quite often the problem isn't that you cannot afford the insurance arrangements these provide. The problem is that you don't have access to them.


> You are a blithering subservient moron if you
> believe they can do it fairly, efficiently or
> without corruption.

And if you stopped worshipping at the alter of supposedly free market economics and took a good look at what is actually going on, you'd notice that by allowing a few health insurance companies to dominate the marketplace we no longer have anything approaching a free market. The working health care consumer for whom the market exists does not even get a seat at the bargaining table.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> And if you stopped worshipping at the alter of
> supposedly free market economics and took a good
> look at what is actually going on, you'd notice
> that by allowing a few health insurance companies
> to dominate the marketplace we no longer have
> anything approaching a free market. The working
> health care consumer for whom the market exists
> does not even get a seat at the bargaining table.

Open them up over state lines then. Theres no reason it should be state to state.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The status quo, as flawed and fucked as it is,
> is
> > preferable
>
> Only if you work in a government job that provides
> health insurance, if you are middle or upper
> income level in a large company, if you are
> retired and covered by medicare or through a
> similar retirement arrangement, or if you get
> coverage through a family member who falls into
> one of these groups. If you don't, quite often
> the problem isn't that you cannot afford the
> insurance arrangements these provide. The problem
> is that you don't have access to them.
>
>
> > You are a blithering subservient moron if you
> > believe they can do it fairly, efficiently or
> > without corruption.
>
> And if you stopped worshipping at the alter of
> supposedly free market economics and took a good
> look at what is actually going on, you'd notice
> that by allowing a few health insurance companies
> to dominate the marketplace we no longer have
> anything approaching a free market. The working
> health care consumer for whom the market exists
> does not even get a seat at the bargaining table.

Si Senor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hospital costs are expensive because of the unpaid
> bills from deadbeats and illegals. They have to
> recoup the loss somehow. Need a first hand look
> go to the ER in Fairfax Hospital and see for
> yourself. The hospitals must treat them they
> cannot be refused.


Theres some truth to that but even thats overblown. Treating them generally costs the hospital a few bucks at most, its more because they can. INOVA makes a ton of money and doesnt really put it back into better care very often, their care is actually very overrated.

The hospital will be open and the doctors will be there regardless of if an illegal comes in or not so theres no cost to either of those. The supplies that cant be replaces are generally only a few bucks if they dont need surgery. Even if they need a test like a ct scan youre just losing money on the contrast dye and the power it takes to run the machine which isnt much. Whether he got that test or not that machine would be there so would the radiologists.

If they would actually hire their own staff and not outsource everything they wouldnt get a bill (if they even do) every time their staffs services are used.

Theyll claim they lost 1500 or 2k but in reality they probably didnt even lose 50 dollars, rather they just lost out on a money making chance.

Maybe one day theyll figure out what other hospitals have and have a separate part of the ER for non serious things for people who use it as a family doctor and you wont have to wait 6 hours to get seen every time.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Only if you work in a government job that provides
> health insurance, if you are middle or upper
> income level in a large company, if you are
> retired and covered by medicare or through a
> similar retirement arrangement, or if you get
> coverage through a family member who falls into
> one of these groups. If you don't, quite often
> the problem isn't that you cannot afford the
> insurance arrangements these provide. The problem
> is that you don't have access to them.


Forgot to mention this is complete BS. You can get private health care plans, access is not an issue at all.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The status quo, as flawed and fucked as it is,
> is
> > preferable
>
> Only if you work in a government job that provides
> health insurance, if you are middle or upper
> income level in a large company, if you are
> retired and covered by medicare or through a
> similar retirement arrangement, or if you get
> coverage through a family member who falls into
> one of these groups. If you don't, quite often
> the problem isn't that you cannot afford the
> insurance arrangements these provide. The problem
> is that you don't have access to them.
>
>
> > You are a blithering subservient moron if you
> > believe they can do it fairly, efficiently or
> > without corruption.
>
> And if you stopped worshipping at the alter of
> supposedly free market economics and took a good
> look at what is actually going on, you'd notice
> that by allowing a few health insurance companies
> to dominate the marketplace we no longer have
> anything approaching a free market. The working
> health care consumer for whom the market exists
> does not even get a seat at the bargaining table.


Consumers can bargain if they have more choices, they bargain with their purchasing decisions. Burdening the insurance companies (yes, I said that) with more regs are driving prices up already.

Dude, you are a baby boomer socialist masquerading as some anti-establishment free thinker. You are a government believer and worshipper, your previous posts show that.

You are probably a fairly educated guy but you do not and will not get it on the subject of human behavior.

Bill- your professors didn't know shit.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Forgot to mention this is complete BS. You can
> get private health care plans, access is not an
> issue at all.

Having access to private health care plans IS NOT THE SAME as having access to the better quality plans that governments and large employers are able to provide their employees at something approaching the rates paid by those employers. My company is part of a group that gives us the ability to purchase certain health insurance policies at rates and terms better than those offered to the general market. However the terms and rates we get are nowhere near as good as those available to governments and larger employers. In addition we enjoy grandfather status within our group, and a comparable company opening up next door today would not be able to get what we have.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Forgot to mention this is complete BS. You can
> > get private health care plans, access is not an
> > issue at all.
>
> Having access to private health care plans IS NOT
> THE SAME as having access to the better quality
> plans that governments and large employers are
> able to provide their employees at something
> approaching the rates paid by those employers. My
> company is part of a group that gives us the
> ability to purchase certain health insurance
> policies at rates and terms better than those
> offered to the general market. However the terms
> and rates we get are nowhere near as good as those
> available to governments and larger employers. In
> addition we enjoy grandfather status within our
> group, and a comparable company opening up next
> door today would not be able to get what we have.

You dont get the same rate because theres no one to offset your cost on your plan like there is on group plans. The same coverage is available it just costs more because of that and the fact that no one else is chipping in for the cost. The larger the group the better rate you can get as more healthy people will offset the cost of the sick.

Youre changing your argument around anyway. First it was people can afford it but dont have access now its there but it costs too much. Which one is it?

Furthermore Obamacares DOESNT change that. Government employees and the ones making the laws have exempted themselves to keep their plans instead. This is a moot point and if anything makes Obamacare look like a bigger failure.

Not only that but now not only will you not get those plans youll pay more for what you do get if your company hasnt dropped health care all together or cut you back to part time work.

It really sounds like you started at a conclusion and are working backwards trying to defend it

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Consumers can bargain if they have more choices,
> they bargain with their purchasing decisions.
> Burdening the insurance companies (yes, I said
> that) with more regs are driving prices up
> already.

The difference between a theoretical ability to bargain and an actual ability is market clout. If you don't have it, then merely having choices does not do much for you. As for choices these has been a major consolidation both in insurance companies and in major health care providers.

Insurers are subject to regulations. Big deal. So is everyone. And while the government imposes regulations on insurance companies to make them do business in a certain way, insurance companies have been for years imposing their own regulations on both their insured and on health care providers in order to force them to do business in a way the insurance companies want.

> Bill- your professors didn't know shit.

I was going to point out that would include Herbert Stein, but he actually favored a level of government involvement in the marketplace.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Consumers can bargain if they have more
> choices,
> > they bargain with their purchasing decisions.
> > Burdening the insurance companies (yes, I said
> > that) with more regs are driving prices up
> > already.
>
> The difference between a theoretical ability to
> bargain and an actual ability is market clout. If
> you don't have it, then merely having choices does
> not do much for you. As for choices these has
> been a major consolidation both in insurance
> companies and in major health care providers.
>
> Insurers are subject to regulations. Big deal.
> So is everyone. And while the government imposes
> regulations on insurance companies to make them do
> business in a certain way, insurance companies
> have been for years imposing their own regulations
> on both their insured and on health care providers
> in order to force them to do business in a way the
> insurance companies want.
>
> > Bill- your professors didn't know shit.
>
> I was going to point out that would include
> Herbert Stein, but he actually favored a level of
> government involvement in the marketplace.


I wouldn't argue with Wingnutty, he graduated from the School of Hard Knocks, you're not gonna pull the wool over his eyes.

Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Youre changing your argument around anyway. First
> it was people can afford it but dont have access
> now its there but it costs too much. Which one is
> it?

No I am not changing my argument. To you so long as the general public can purchase an insurance product that contains almost as many benefits as those offered to prime employers, even if it is available at significantly greater cost, then the product is AVAILABLE to the general public. To me the price is among the terms that have to be roughly comparable for the product to be deemed available. Now I am not saying there must be NO difference in price-COBRA does allow for a differential to cover administrative costs and I would concede the same.

With very few exceptions health insurance companies do not spread the risks of health insurance coverage over each employer or each group. They instead spread it over a much larger pool of customers.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Youre changing your argument around anyway.
> First
> > it was people can afford it but dont have
> access
> > now its there but it costs too much. Which one
> is
> > it?
>
> No I am not changing my argument. To you so long
> as the general public can purchase an insurance
> product that contains almost as many benefits as
> those offered to prime employers, even if it is
> available at significantly greater cost, then the
> product is AVAILABLE to the general public. To me
> the price is among the terms that have to be
> roughly comparable for the product to be deemed
> available. Now I am not saying there must be NO
> difference in price-COBRA does allow for a
> differential to cover administrative costs and I
> would concede the same.

Obamacare doesnt change that, all it does it make it even more expensive for private plans and company plans.

> With very few exceptions health insurance
> companies do not spread the risks of health
> insurance coverage over each employer or each
> group. They instead spread it over a much larger
> pool of customers.

They spread it over both. The larger income from the group purchase means better rates, thats the exact same for buying anything anywhere. If you buy one car you pay sticker, if you but enough for a car dealership you get bulk discounts.

Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It really sounds like you started at a conclusion
> and are working backwards trying to defend it

Only because you missed the starting point, which I've often said, is that we don't repeal Obamacare, we replace it with something better. To me the failure of Obamacare was that it didn't adequately address the problems which drove us to seek health care reform in the first place because it failed to take on the interests that profited from those problems. Repeal will merely perpetuate the failings of the pre-Obamacare system.

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> goafter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Go after the stupid idiots who sue the hospital
> > non stop all the time.
> >
> > Freeze all hospital costs. fire the person who
> > authorised the price increase of sippy paper
> cups
> > to be priced at $500.00 and ban them from
> working
> > with the healthy industry as a whole.
> >
> >
> > Then when they are sued and can not pay the
> fines
> > then close the hospital down and name the
> person
> > responsible for the suit.
> >
> > Also fire the doctors and ban them from the
> health
> > industry if they leave tools inside the
> patients.
> >
> > No simple emergency room visit should cost
> $800.00
> > Unless you are truly dying and close to death.
>
>
> Part of the problem: Medicare and Medicaid.
>
> Because these programs exist, and because the
> government(taxpayer) will reimburse cost of
> procedure and supplies, there is a disincentive to
> keep costs down. Because people have little
> respect for the government, they are hardly
> concerned about bloated charges. As long as they
> can send the bill to someone else, who really
> cares.
>
> The attitude is the same in food and utilities. If
> you go to lunch, you may be thinking chicken
> sandwich. If your boss is paying, the prime rib is
> more likely to come to mind. If you pay your own
> electric bill, you are more likely to turn the
> lights out. If utilities are "free" chances are
> you'll pop open the windows on a Winter day and
> leave the TV on and not give a single fuck.
>
> But if you propose streamlining these welfare
> programs, the Democrats accuse you of wanting to
> kill seniors and being cruel.


You are partially right. Medicare and Medicaid are problems, however not for the reasons that you stated. There is a fixed amount that the government will pay per procedure, regardless of the amount billed. Doctors cannot just bill whatever they want to bill. The problem is that the government pays so little for Medicare and Medicaid procedures that doctors are severely limiting the number of these patients they will see. Some are even refusing to take on any Medicare/Medicaid patients.

There is a lot of fraud in the system also. This happens when the doctors fraudulently bill for services that were not rendered. We were told that fraud, waste and abuse would end under Obamacare and it would contribute to our healthcare costs going down. It is becoming evident that that will not happen.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It really sounds like you started at a
> conclusion
> > and are working backwards trying to defend it
>
> Only because you missed the starting point, which
> I've often said, is that we don't repeal
> Obamacare, we replace it with something better.
> To me the failure of Obamacare was that it didn't
> adequately address the problems which drove us to
> seek health care reform in the first place because
> it failed to take on the interests that profited
> from those problems. Repeal will merely
> perpetuate the failings of the pre-Obamacare
> system.

You have to repeal something before it can be replaced. Leaving it in tact only makes any future changes harder because the first ones were so awful and punishes people in the mean time.

So what's the Republican solution? Oh that's right, Obama Care was the Republican solution. Only alternative left is single payer. Be careful what you retards wish for. You just might get it.

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Notice how Buffet emphasizes the problem of
> "COSTS" of healthcare?
>
> I'll be fucking-go-to-hell...

Both you and Warren are gonna be disappointed, WingNut: Obamacare is here to stay.

Si Senor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hospital costs are expensive because of the unpaid
> bills from deadbeats and illegals. They have to
> recoup the loss somehow. Need a first hand look
> go to the ER in Fairfax Hospital and see for
> yourself. The hospitals must treat them they
> cannot be refused.


Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.

Non-payment is hardly a fraction of health care costs. Not to mention the feds will cover it eventually when the hospitals apply for relief of that debt.

Have you been the Fairfax lately? Notice the sign on the wall stating they aren't refusing to serve people if they refer them to a free clinic based on the NON-emergency reason for the visit?

liberal logic 27 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Both you and Warren are gonna be disappointed,
> WingNut: Obamacare is here to stay.


Please, put down the crack pipe. The Affordable Healthcare Act, will not be fully enacted as passed through legislation. There's too many "gotchas" in there because Nancy Pelosi just wanted to rush this heaping pile of cow dung through to get approved.

There is a reason why we need term limits for politicians. I'm speaking about both sides of the aisle, too. We have enough career politicians in the house of representatives and the senate the need to go. We need to kick 'em all out and start over. None of these people represent the people who they represent. They're only there to represent themselves, and the big-buck cronies who paid big money in to the campaigns to get them there.

'Nuff said.

From Da Hood Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There's too many "gotchas" in there because
> Nancy Pelosi just wanted to rush this heaping
> pile of cow dung through to get approved.

Doesn't matter. The ACA is the law of the land.

> There is a reason why we need term limits for
> politicians. I'm speaking about both sides of the
> aisle, too. We have enough career politicians in
> the house of representatives and the senate the
> need to go. We need to kick 'em all out and start
> over. None of these people represent the people
> who they represent. They're only there to
> represent themselves, and the big-buck cronies who
> paid big money in to the campaigns to get them
> there.

I feel ya, but that has nothing to do with the ACA, which is here to stay.

Maybe Obama should listen to the Oracle.

The whole thing is an online clusterfuck even after having over 3 years to plan.


From all estimations, insurance costs will be rising instead of falling.


Barry has given out exemptions to some larger corporations and unions.


ObamaCare seems on the trajectory of most "good government ideas". FAILURE.


Barry can tap out now and use Buffet for the out, his opinion is pretty highly respected.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe Obama should listen to the Oracle.
>
> The whole thing is an online clusterfuck even
> after having over 3 years to plan.
>
> From all estimations, insurance costs will be
> rising instead of falling.
>
> Barry has given out exemptions to some larger
> corporations and unions.
>
> ObamaCare seems on the trajectory of most "good
> government ideas". FAILURE.
>
> Barry can tap out now and use Buffet for the out,
> his opinion is pretty highly respected.

It's cute how you keep harping on this nonsense, Nutty.

The ACA is the law of the land and it will stand, regardless GOP-tard machinations.


Attachments:

They're like the defense industry. You can buy a wheelchair ramp from a medical supplier for $200, or you can a rubber ramp for your threshold for $40 at any hardware store.

eLester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They're like the defense industry. You can buy a
> wheelchair ramp from a medical supplier for $200,
> or you can a rubber ramp for your threshold for
> $40 at any hardware store.

A rare true word from my progressive friend.

But why would you want to trust these proven gangsters with such a big part of the economy?

We've seen their work, and it is NOT GOOD.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

war-in-buffet is an old money guy. he builds things you don't see him breaking shit and laughing

worry about the nuevo-riche - who can't handle money