More Obamacare fuckups

[cwolff]

Your bizaare Social Security non sequitur suggests you have nary a clue about what is being talked about. There has been no introduction of the poor "paying for" the benefits of Social Security.

The point (which you fail to get, because you're either purposefully obtuse or an idiot) is that Ayn Rand woul've starved without Social Security. It makes her opposition ridiculous, similar to how Paul Ryan would've never been the success that he is without Social Security benefiting his family.

The logic here is that the social safety net works. It's work well enough that even the biggest critics of it have needed it, taken advantage of it and benefited. Rand and her husband both relied on it which is totally fine. They paid in, and they should get the benefit. It just shows that her ideas fail.

As Pryor said, "Doctors cost a lot more money than books earn and she could be totally wiped out" without the aid of these two government programs. Ayn took the bail out even though Ayn "despised government interference and felt that people should and could live independently... She didn't feel that an individual should take help."

But alas she did and said it was wrong for everyone else to do so. Apart from the strong implication that those who take the help are morally weak, it is also a philosophic point that such help dulls the will to work, to save and government assistance is said to dull the entrepreneurial spirit.

In the end, Miss Rand was a hypocrite but she could never be faulted for failing to act in her own self-interest.

[Warriorbird]

Have to go with bandit, your logic is heavily flawed, to assume that removing one variable allows you to predict an outcome with any certain is pure arrogance. No one can say what might happen if you change one small thing in a situation as dynamic as a persons life, for all you know it would have turned out exactly the same.

Your notion would certainly remove all objections to this bill too.

[Wrathbringer]

If this stuff were true it might actually be compelling. There's numerous factual errors throughout.

Why don't you enlighten us all as to what they are?

[Warriorbird]

Why don't you enlighten us all as to what they are?

The primary one and why I deleted the post is due to it being about a completely different bill than ACA.

There is no "free abortion" care. Private insurance companies love this bill. All decisions about personal healthcare are not made by Federal bureaucrats.

Then he conveniently and in an intellectually bankrupt fashion attempts to portray Constitutional law as having only one interpretation.

Then comes the fact that the "right to privacy" he talks about derives from Griswold v. Connecticut, Roe. v. Wade. and Lawrence v. Texas which are cases he actually wants to see overturned from his other scholarship.

[Parkbandit]

Let's break it down further for you.

When without a certain thing you wouldn't have continued to live/be successful, complaining about that certain thing is ridiculous.

So because Ayn Rand paid into Social Security and used it later on in her life.. she has no right to criticize the program?

Fantastic. Please, I'm begging you.. continue.

[Wrathbringer]

The primary one and why I deleted the post is due to it being about a completely different bill than ACA.

There is no "free abortion" care. Private insurance companies love this bill. All decisions about personal healthcare are not made by Federal bureaucrats.

Then he conveniently and in an intellectually bankrupt fashion attempts to portray Constitutional law as having only one interpretation.

Then comes the fact that the "right to privacy" he talks about derives from Griswold v. Connecticut, Roe. v. Wade. and Lawrence v. Texas which are cases he actually wants to see overturned from his other scholarship.

Fair enough. And the rest of it? How about rationing of care? Don't think that'll happen?

[Warriorbird]

So because Ayn Rand paid into Social Security and used it later on in her life.. she has no right to criticize the program?

Fantastic. Please, I'm begging you.. continue.

No. Because Ayn Rand would've died without Social Security (and waxed poetic about refusing entitlements) it renders her criticism ridiculous. Much like how Paul Ryan's criticism of Social Security is ridiculous, given how he wouldn't be in Congress without it.

[Parkbandit]

No. Because Ayn Rand would've died without Social Security (and waxed poetic about refusing entitlements) it renders her criticism ridiculous. Much like how Paul Ryan's criticism of Social Security is ridiculous, given how he wouldn't be in Congress without it.

So, if a program helps even one person.. it should be praised, no matter the cost.

When did Social Security become an entitlement? I thought that was the left's main defense of that system?

This is really great stuff. Thanks.

[Back]

So because Ayn Rand paid into Social Security and used it later on in her life.. she has no right to criticize the program?

Fantastic. Please, I'm begging you.. continue.

[Parkbandit]