Crime Created by ‘System,’ Successful People ‘Just Lucky,’

[Disgustipated]

There is nothing left for me to say.

Thank you.

 

[Sean Renaud]

You were serious. Jesus Fuck.

If you actually think it's perfectly acceptable to blame others instead of taking responsibility for your own actions you're too far gone. I know some people feel that way but I've never actually seen an adult actually admit it.

There is nothing left for me to say.

It's not only acceptable it's necessary for people to understand how the world actually functions. It's frightening that so many adults pretend that the world works differently than it actually does.

 

[RobDownSouth]

His biggest accomplishment, the ACA still has more holes in it than a new Microsoft OS.

Tell that to someone who was denied health insurance for pre-existing conditions under the old system.

 

[RobDownSouth]

It's not only acceptable it's necessary for people to understand how the world actually functions. It's frightening that so many adults pretend that the world works differently than it actually does.

That's the demographic who believe that other people should suffer for their ideological purity.

And those glibertarians wonder why they never garner more than 2 or 3% of the popular vote.

 

[someoneyouknow]

Here's Phil Knight's take on being lucky:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/nikes-phil-knight-tells-you-how-to-make-25-billion-2016-05-11

 

[BotanyBoy]

You wish he'd been louder about promoting self-pity and encouraging young people to blame others for their failures instead of accepting personal responsibility for their own behavior?

Young people blaming older people for the shit ball that was handed to them isn't blaming others for their failures.

It's putting the blame squarely where it lies. The last 20 years are pretty much all the boomers fault....starting to become GenX's fault, it won't be millennials fault for another 20 years at least.

Talk about lack of personal responsibility

Tell that to someone who was denied health insurance for pre-existing conditions under the old system.

That carrot, the one the insurance companies and (D)'s dangled in front of you chanting "LOOK!! PROGRESS!!!" doesn't negate the fact that it's a crony as fuck insurance scam made law.

ACA = a rust covered, piss stank, barely running 95' Ford Taurus with a 100 Million dollar price tag.....you can point at the fuzzy dice all you want but at the end of the day it's still an insanely overpriced piece of fuckin' shit.

 

[snugglestruggle]

Tell that to someone who was denied health insurance for pre-existing conditions under the old system.

Hey, that's the one thing about it that is good. However, he didn't have to wreck the healthcare system and drive costs up (which were already high). Obama had a democratic controlled congress for 2 years, he could have just passed a law making that illegal. There is still 20 million or so without health insurance. It was supposed to cover 30 million people, what happened?

 

[Sean]

You were serious. Jesus Fuck.

If you actually think it's perfectly acceptable to blame others instead of taking responsibility for your own actions you're too far gone. I know some people feel that way but I've never actually seen an adult actually admit it.

There is nothing left for me to say.

Miles, you've been blaming Obama for everything wrong in your life for the last eight years.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Hey, that's the one thing about it that is good. However, he didn't have to wreck the healthcare system and drive costs up (which were already high). Obama had a democratic controlled congress for 2 years, he could have just passed a law making that illegal. There is still 20 million or so without health insurance. It was supposed to cover 30 million people, what happened?

He didn't drive up costs and he couldn't just pass a law making that illegal. It would have bankrupt all the companies.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Hey, that's the one thing about it that is good. However, he didn't have to wreck the healthcare system and drive costs up (which were already high). Obama had a democratic controlled congress for 2 years, he could have just passed a law making that illegal. There is still 20 million or so without health insurance. It was supposed to cover 30 million people, what happened?

Obama had a Democratic majority in Congress. This is true. However, Joe Lieberman and Max Baucus declared early on that public option (single payer) was off the table (Lieberman was bankrolled by insurance companies) and Ben Nelson declared his support of public option was conditional upon ALL abortions banned at the federal level, which was not going to happen. *poof* No majority, no single payer.

Someone has already explained to you how simply waving fairy dust and outlawing pre-existing conditions would have bankrupted the Insurance industry.

The reason so many people are still uninsured? One out of every five is not a legal citizen here. Non-citizens are barred from insurance.

The Heritage plan promoted by President Obama but a key part was massive Federal expansion of Medicaid (Feds picking up 90% of the cost). Many Republican governors sued and Scalia legislated from the bench to declare that these governors had a new "right" to deny people coverage in order to gain favor with their base.

Additionally, there are some truly sad parents who don't love their children enough to want to insure them. Around here, we had Julybabby04 who declared it un-Biblical for her to pay more than $300 a month for her family of seven (the cost increase interfered with her family annual Disney World vacation). VatAss the Ishspawn decided he had enough money saved up to avoid covering any and all illnesses or catestrophes befalling his two girls. And at the extreme bottom of the well, we have Queerbait, who bragged about not taking his children to the doctor for ten years, even when they broke bones.

 

[hashtag45]

He's worried about his legacy. His biggest accomplishment, the ACA still has more holes in it than a new Microsoft OS. What's he have left? His E.O.'s on immigration? Lifting sanctions on Cuba (which I agree with)? Blowing up the debt ceiling?

I heard that the US is now heavily indebted.
I'd be curious to hear how that happened over the years, taaa…

 

[Sean Renaud]

We spend more than we take in, the debt isn't complicated.

 

[nerfhearder]

We spend more than we take in, the debt isn't complicated.

That's the deficit not the debt.

 

[Sean Renaud]

That's the deficit not the debt.

It's both actually. The deficit is just annual as opposed to the grand total.

 

[hashtag45]

We spend more than we take in, the debt isn't complicated.

Nice.
It was only a question, I don't intend to flood the thread with stupid statements when I'm obviously out of my depth regarding a particular topic.

And I wasn't asking for a lesson in economy and boring nombers. I was hoping more for something in the line of an analyst's view, comparing Bush's to Obama's and to previous policies in this regards.

 

[hashtag45]

I thought that this discussion on Wuora was interesting:

Who created more debt – Bush or Obama?
https://www.quora.com/Who-created-more-debt-–-Bush-or-Obama

1.Charlie Fortin
"If you just go by the numbers, or even the numbers as a % of GDP Obama has spent more than GWB by a very large margin.
Then other questions become more important.
What did we get for our money?
Are we better off?"

2.George Gonzalez
"The question is misguided in so many ways. First, presidents don't directly cate debt, about all they can do is lobby for particular spending legislation.

then there are good reasons for going into debt, and poor ones. Like, a good one: stimulating the economy when it's in a sharp slump due to a financial and housing crisis, and a bad one: getting into an expensive war for no reason.
Bush in relative terms, Obama in absolute terms.

Although I disagree with the premise - the president's policies are only partly responsible for any debt the country carries. The congress, specifically the house of representatives, originates all spending bills."

 

[hashtag45]

Cont:

3.Arjun Subramaniam

This is not an easy question - The numbers alone don't give the full picture.
Bush, 2 terms - $4.9 trillion
Obama, 1 term - $5.3 trillion

So, if you look at it empirically, Obama has "created" more debt in his one term than Bush did in 2 terms. However, there is a lot more involved in the equation. Bush's policies might have added significantly to the debt while Obama was in office. Let's take a look and try to clear up this muddle:

While Bush's rate of rise was slower, he nearly doubled the US debt ( 86% ) compared to Obama ( 49% ).

The total federal debt in relation to the economy is reaching historically high levels — approaching levels not seen since World War II. But it can also be seen that the rise started long before Obama took office.
In fact, the upward trend began with Ronald Reagan’s fiscal 1982 budget, declined somewhat from …… .etc. etc.

Let's now take a look at Obama's policies. Much of his spending has focused on the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, but even more has come from a combination of a two-year extension of the Bush tax cuts and other mandatory spending. However, Obama's increased focus on deficit reduction has paid off significantly in the long run. Automatic spending cuts have reduced the deficit by $503 billion, and cuts to defense and Health Care have amounted to a total of about $400 bilion.

Assuming the accuracy of this chart, we can conclude that: The cost of Bush's policies was $5.1 trillion, and the cost of Obama's policies was a mere $983 billion.

Bottom Line: It's not fair to blame the debt situation on Obama, singularly because the debt numerically went up more than it did under Bush. Bush inherited a booming economy at the time of his inauguration, but his handling of many events left the country absolutely devastated; Hurricane Katrina, 9/11 (two unnecessary wars), and the looming recession. Obama inherited a country that couldn't go further down, in one of the worst recessions since the Great Depression. He had to live with the Bush tax cuts for 2 years, and two long, brutal wars for 2 after that."





EDIT.
The discussion was a lot longer; these excerpts represent only a %, so I'm within the forum guidelines.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Hey, that's the one thing about it that is good. However, he didn't have to wreck the healthcare system and drive costs up (which were already high). Obama had a democratic controlled congress for 2 years, he could have just passed a law making that illegal. There is still 20 million or so without health insurance. It was supposed to cover 30 million people, what happened?

It was not good. It wreaked havoc with the insurance industry and was nothing more than a hidden tax on the rest of it. It would have just been better to give doctors and hospitals write-offs for pro bono work...

Government, and most of its supporters have they have demonstrated over and over are simply convinced that when they add a new cost or tax to a business that it simply and magically just takes it out of "profits." The economic illiteracy is astounding and the rhetorical sophism and magic unicorn solutions never cease to amaze me. Everyone seems to believe that the free market can be replaced with simple solutions sans consequence. All you need is the best and brightest in government and paradise is just around the corner...

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

It was not good. It wreaked havoc with the insurance industry and was nothing more than a hidden tax on the rest of it. It would have just been better to give doctors and hospitals write-offs for pro bono work...

Government, and most of its supporters have they have demonstrated over and over are simply convinced that when they add a new cost or tax to a business that it simply and magically just takes it out of "profits." The economic illiteracy is astounding and the rhetorical sophism and magic unicorn solutions never cease to amaze me. Everyone seems to believe that the free market can be replaced with simple solutions sans consequence. All you need is the best and brightest in government and paradise is just around the corner...

Actually Cap'n Disingenuous, all that would have been required was for the Republicans (and Not Republican "conservatives") in Congress to refrain from actively sabotaging health care reform.

They could not, because they care more about their party than they care about the people whom they are supposed to be serving. They made 161 amendments to the ACA. Democrats stupidly worked with the GOP who was not negotiating in good faith. The Democratic majority should have scrapped all 161 GOP amendments as soon as this was figured out and pushed through single payer. Why not? All of those amendments were agreed to in anticipation of some level of support in a bipartisan endeavor but resulted in not a single Republican vote.

This was done so that the GOP could claim that the Democrats forced the ACA down their throats, neglecting to mention that the GOP had a great deal to do with and in fact intentionally caused some of the problems with the ACA.

 

[miles]

Originally Posted by RobDownSouth View Post
Tell that to someone who was denied health insurance for pre-existing conditions under the old system.

And there you have it...the mindless meme of "if it only helps a few people it's worth it."

What a douche. Next he'll hit a tree and want to buy insurance that will cover his accident retroactively.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Originally Posted by RobDownSouth View Post
Tell that to someone who was denied health insurance for pre-existing conditions under the old system.

And there you have it...the mindless meme of "if it only helps a few people it's worth it."

What a douche. Next he'll hit a tree and want to buy insurance that will cover his accident retroactively.

Because getting sick is exactly the same as crashing your car.

You're a fucking moron miles.

Oh and miles, fuck off and die in a fire.

 

[miles]

^^Words of wisdom from another of life's biggest losers.

 

[RobDownSouth]

And there you have it...the mindless meme of "if it only helps a few people it's worth it."

What a douche. Next he'll hit a tree and want to buy insurance that will cover his accident retroactively.

The number of uninsured due to pre-existing conditions was much more than "a few".

And I had very good health insurance that covered virtually all of my auto accident expenses. That's what insurance is for.

 

[miles]

"If you like your doctor you can keep him."
"If you like your insurance plan you can keep it."

Liberals don't care that The Fraud literally lied dozens of times to fool Congress into voting for this disaster, how many people are being screwed or how much damage its done to the economy. It helped some people.

What mindless stupidity.

 

[miles]

Double