well, or on any topic I am convinced. Well, most topics at least.
I think none of this is about truth. Youâre fighting about opinions, not facts.
1 Like
@ClaudnDaye I do support President Trump because he is our duly elected President. But I certainly donât think he is a saint, hasnât lied, hasnât used leverage in his business dealings, etc.
I was merely using President Trump as an example, knowing how much you despise him, to demonstrate that, as @Chris said, truth can sometimes be an individual evaluation of circumstances. These evaluations are borne out of individual prejudices.
Your political truths are no more or less the truth than my political truths or Fox Newsâ political truths or MSNBCâs political truths.
The understanding of this on both sides is crucial to our country coming together to solve the problems we face.
I just sleep really soundly knowing that the IRS has a better accounting of my coin collection because of the affordable care act
Iâm sorry I donât follow.
But you said you read the whole thing bill didnât you?
@ClaudnDaye Why do you pick that inconsequential-to-the-point tidbit out of my post? I am not arguing President Trumpâs sainthood or devilishness.
I was trying to make the point that @Chris was correct when he said that sometimes truth is somewhat fluid. And every post you are making on this thread seems to prove my point. Calm down.
Well yes, 7 years ago. But i think youâre basically referring to the fact that some people who deal in these things like gold probably werenât reporting their whole income to the IRS anyways. and I guess I donât have a problem with that. 
I mean, the government takes my money for all reported income, why shouldnât it be the same for someone whoâs buying hundreds of dollars in I donât know, Sacajawea coins or whatever.
I see it more as the truth not being fluid as peopleâs values being different. It might objectively be true that X million people wind up losing coverage â but perhaps for you the value of personal freedom from paying taxes exceeds the value of preventing negative health outcomes for some fraction of those people. In the end, you will see this as an ultimately good option.
For someone else, they donât value this type of freedom, or maybe they reject the notion that this is really a true form of freedom, and they are very concerned about physical harms. So to them this is catastrophic.
EtcâŚ
1 Like
@ClaudnDaye I know that you are a ferocious enough father that, whatever happens, there is no chance that harm will come to your son on your watch. Heâs lucky to have a Dad like you.
2 Likes
I think he was using the phrase âhonest businessmanâ as well as âmadmanâ as more of an example of the rhetorical positions each of you might take. Unless Iâm totally confused. Sorry for putting words in your mouth @docslotnick if that wasnât the case.
2 Likes
Honestly, I cried a few weeks ago too when I thought about it. I know weâll be okay â weâre scrabblers and hustlers by nature and weâll figure out a way to make things work. But I think about all the people just like Samson who may live dramatically foreshortened lives (people like Shane Boyle) and it really makes me sad.
1 Like
yes, thatâs how I feel too. I think the people I am most concerned about are the people and children with lifelong, severe disabilities. By capping Medicaid reimbursements, they are creating an incentive for states to toss people of the rolls. Now, some states may choose to take the able bodied young people off the list first â a logical path, but another option is to simply take off the most expensive cases from their rolls. Those may be the kids with lifelong disabilities who simply canât live on their own.
This may not make it pass the budget parliamentarian, as by the rules of reconciliation they can only alter or amend laws that pertain mainly to the budget, and this may be seen as not meeting that criteria.
Harold, I think youâre a great guy⌠but the realization that the left in this country is so far off into a state of hysteria that they have convinced themselves and each other that their loved ones are literally going to die if a mainstream political platform (other than the one they subscribe to) manages to pass some healthcare reforms, is just absolutely bizarre to me.
1 Like
lol I remember it quite a bit differently. I remember healthcare being much more affordable to everyone and poor people being on Medicaid.
I remember the vast vast majority of the people who didnât have coverage not even wanting coverage because they were young and healthy, and I remember the preexisting conditions thing as a total red herring because like 98% of Americans were covered by group plans that were effectively never allowed to exclude them.
I remember my familyâs out of pocket medical expenses being zero. Last year they were in excess of $30,000
lol you asked if I remember what it was like before the ACA. Yes I do, I remember it quite fondly.
@Sam, I think the view really depends on a) your age b) your financial position in the last 10-20 years and c) who you know personally. Obamacare benefited some people and hurt others.
Iâve known tons of people who were directly screwed over by the last health care system. I know for sure that many of them are incredibly relieved to have the guarantee of healthcare that comes with Obamacare. (I am pretty privileged but even I remember the awfulness of having a broken limb not covered AT ALL by an insurance plan.)
I think thatâs the difference. who are your friends? How old were they? What were they doing with their lives?
Plus, you have many perks living in Alaska but affordable healthcare premiums are not one of them. So your view of the healthcare system right now is especially crummy. Itâs actually pretty good for me in California.
1 Like
did you have kids back then? Theyâre $$$$.
Also, did you not know anyone who went bankrupt from medical bills or hit their lifetime cap?