[QUOTE=Hey Yo;15036227]Republicans are solely to blame? Why do you say that?[/QUOTE]
Same reason you blamed the Democrats in the first post.
Printable View
[QUOTE=Hey Yo;15036227]Republicans are solely to blame? Why do you say that?[/QUOTE]
Same reason you blamed the Democrats in the first post.
[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;15036228]Not solely, I suppose.
But given that they[B] own all 3 branches[/B] at the moment it seems like there is definitely something that could have been done here. And it certainly isn't being shut down by the Democrats as your OP suggests.[/QUOTE]
60 votes are needed in the Senate - there aren't 60 Republicans. Dems are the ones who want changes - republicans want a clean, continuing resolution to have more time to discuss/debate/negotiate (without the government being shut down).
[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;15036228]Not solely, I suppose.
But given that they own all 3 branches at the moment it seems like there is definitely something that could have been done here. And it certainly isn't being shut down by the Democrats as your OP suggests.[/QUOTE]
When you ask for extremely unreasonable things... then it's hard to agree
[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;15036229]Same reason you blamed the Democrats in the first post.[/QUOTE]
See my post above
Two Democratic senators and one independent who caucuses with them crossed party lines to support the G.O.P. plan to keep government funding flowing.
In votes just hours before the shutdown and again on Wednesday after it had begun, Senators Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, both Democrats, and Angus King, the Maine independent who caucuses with them, were the only members of the minority to vote for a simple, roughly seven-week funding extension sought by Republicans.
In doing so, they broke with Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, who has pressed his party to hold the line against the G.O.P. spending plan until Republicans and President Trump negotiate with Democrats on a compromise that includes health care concessions.
[url]https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/01/us/politics/democrats-shutdown-vote.html[/url]
[QUOTE=Hey Yo;15036236]See my post above[/QUOTE]
You're too far gone to realize it but one side wanting money spent one way and another side having a different opinion is basically the reason that there are different political parties. A representative democracy has some kind of negotiation that leads to whatever the budget ends up being. You think the democrats should just be doing whatever Trump tells them to do but everyone doesn't worship your pedo overlord.
"Make America Great Again" :facepalm
We literally had 2 pages here arguing if we should get rid of the enhanced ACA subsidies, because “we can’t afford it” when we’re giving the wealthiest in the country $1trillion in tax cuts. We’re willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of lives for this. Bravo, people, and I though I was unempathetic.
[QUOTE=j3lademaster;15036249]We literally had 2 pages here arguing if we should get rid of the enhanced ACA subsidies, because “we can’t afford it” when we’re giving the wealthiest in the country $1trillion in tax cuts. We’re willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of lives for this. Bravo, people, and I though I was unempathetic.[/QUOTE]
They're job creators.
[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;15036245]You're too far gone to realize it but one side wanting money spent one way and another side having a different opinion is basically the reason that there are different political parties. A representative democracy has some kind of negotiation that leads to whatever the budget ends up being. You think the democrats should just be doing whatever Trump tells them to do but everyone doesn't worship your pedo overlord.[/QUOTE]
Last time.... you brought up Trump and his 34 felony conviction but couldn't tell me what the date was of his sentencing. Now you say he's a pedo so maybe you could tell me this time the date of sentencing and how many years he's facing. Think ya could tell us now, chico?
You say he's a Pedo but have no problem living in a sanctuary city that defends undocumented illegal pedos, rapists, murders. You think crime is fine and don't give a shit about the U.S. laws or the taxpayers. It's you brah who's too far gone. Your priorities are completely fugged up due to TDS.
Your brain appears to actively reject facts. Trump was convicted of felonies. This makes him a felon. You argue with reality which is why you are easily disregarded.
Working on a DoD project, luckily the project had funds already allocated long before we stepped foot on it but i can't imagine being a contractor for the federal government at this point and getting pressured into starting work with the shutdown being in play. I wouldn't lift a finger until the feds get their shit together, bills come rain or shine, or in this instance, government shutdown.
[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;15036257]Your brain appears to actively reject facts. Trump was convicted of felonies. This makes him a felon. You argue with reality which is why you are easily disregarded.[/QUOTE]
You're siding with thousands of undocumented illegal felons... tell me again how you hate felons but stick up for them constantly while talking out the other side of your ass.
[QUOTE=Hey Yo;15036264]You're siding with thousands of undocumented illegal felons... tell me again how you hate felons but stick up for them constantly while talking out the other side of your ass.[/QUOTE]
The insane rants don't help.
Democrats hate America
[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing;15036271]Democrats hate America[/QUOTE]
i know far more democrats defending the constitution than republicans, and i know a lot more republicans in person.
[QUOTE=highwhey;15036274]i know far more democrats defending the constitution than republicans, and i know a lot more republicans in person.[/QUOTE]
Good luck trying to convince people of that.
[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing;15036277]Good luck trying to convince people of that.[/QUOTE]
i don't need to convince anyone, it's 100% true. the current republicans are too busy clapping for trump while he tramples on the constitution. our forefathers would find his actions repulsive, the very anthesis of what the founding fathers were.
[QUOTE=highwhey;15036278][B][I][U] our forefathers[/U][/I][/B][/QUOTE]
What happened to 'viva mexico'?
Schumer should read his own words from 2013.
On the first day of the 2013 government shutdown, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, had a message for Republicans who refused to fund the government unless Congress defunded Obamacare: Hostage-taking would not work.
[b]"As we said a thousand times, we are happy to discuss how to fund the government, but not with a gun to our heads," Schumer said on the Senate floor[/b].
[b]"You are not going to get us to give in to extortion," he continued. "You are not going to take, as hostage, millions of innocent Americans and succeed in getting us to do something you want, and we don't, and they don't.[/b]
Twelve years later, Schumer and Democrats, now in the minority, are staring down another government shutdown -- but one that might be of their own making.
In the Senate, Democrats are withholding support for a measure to keep the government funded at current levels unless Republicans extend subsidies that help some Americans pay for health care through the Affordable Care Act, which are set to expire at year's end, among other demands.
"Under a shutdown, the Trump administration would have wide-ranging authority to deem whole agencies, programs and personnel nonessential, furloughing staff members with no promise they would ever be rehired," Schumer wrote in the New York Times, explaining his vote.
[url]https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/schumer-democrats-find-new-role-shutdown-looms-analysis/story?id=126038340[/url]
Republicans - Lets significantly slash medicaid and other social programs to get MASSIVE taxcuts for the rich through and 100+ billion for ICE, gets rid of green energy investments
Democrats - Don't slash medicaid, and we will let the budget through if you negotiate that
Republicans - FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY. LOOK AT OUR DEFICIT AND DEBT. WE WILL NOT GIVE MEDICAID FUND. (completely forgot about the historic taxcuts they passed). NO NEGOTIATION.
Democrats - Give us Medicaid funds or we won't give you everything you want if we get nothing
Republicans - SEE?? DEMOCRATS SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT. WE WILL START FIRING PEOPLE IF YOU DON'T GIVE US EVERYTHING WE WANT
[QUOTE=bladefd;15036406]Republicans - Lets significantly slash medicaid and other social programs to get MASSIVE taxcuts for the rich through
Democrats - Don't slash medicaid, and we will let the budget through if you negotiate that
Republicans - FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY. WE WILL NOT GIVE MEDICAID FUND. (completely forgot about the historic taxcuts they passed). NO NEGOTIATION.
Democrats - Give us Medicaid funds or we won't give you everything you want if we get nothing
Republicans - SEE?? DEMOCRATS SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT.[/QUOTE]
don't forget their version of fiscal responsibility is giving argentina $20 billion dollars while they bend over American farmers over a barrel and sodomize them.
[QUOTE]Q2 2025: top 10% gained $5T in wealth, bottom 50% gained $150 billion
Top 0.1% wealth has doubled since 2020 from $12.2T to $23.3T with stocks accounting for all of that growth
Top 1% own 50% of all individually held corporate equities and mutual fund shares; top 10% own 87%[/QUOTE]
Why do the top 1% need historic taxcuts?? I'm baffled. They are already gaining SIGNIFICANT wealth and still getting historic taxcuts. While cutting social programs for the middle-class and the poor. Even with those cuts, the taxcuts STILL add a few trillion to the debt. Can anyone justify that?
[QUOTE=Hey Yo;15036235]When you ask for extremely unreasonable things... then it's hard to agree[/QUOTE]
WHAT “extremely unreasonable things”?
[QUOTE=Chick Stern;15036452]WHAT “extremely unreasonable things”?[/QUOTE]
The made-up "healthcare for illegal immigrants" thing.
None of you will address that these extensions were for a once-in-a-lifetime event and were meant to sunset (or would never have passed). Give an inch (covid) and Democrats want not a mile but eternity (permanent). This insane government spending has got to stop - not expand.
Do you ALL really think that ACA subsidies should be available without income limits? Just more insidious movement toward universal healthcare.
[QUOTE=rmt;15036460]None of you will address that these extensions were for a once-in-a-lifetime event and were meant to sunset (or would never have passed). Give an inch (covid) and Democrats want not a mile but eternity (permanent). This insane government spending has got to stop - not expand.
Do you ALL really think that ACA subsidies should be available without income limits? Just more insidious movement toward universal healthcare.[/QUOTE]
Crickets. Are you ALL ok with $12 million unused policies (NO claims in 2024) subsidized by taxpayers? Some states report more subsidized enrollees than census data shows could exist - you all ok with that?
[video=youtube;AK3LSyQe2vc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK3LSyQe2vc[/video]
[QUOTE=rmt;15036460]None of you will address that these extensions were for a once-in-a-lifetime event and were meant to sunset (or would never have passed). Give an inch (covid) and Democrats want not a mile but eternity (permanent). This insane government spending has got to stop - not expand.
Do you ALL really think that ACA subsidies should be available without income limits? Just more insidious movement toward universal healthcare.[/QUOTE]
You have to question why you are against universal healthcare?
Overwhelming evidence shows that it would be much cheaper per capita.
Overwhelming evidence shows that there are better health results in virtually every category.
Overwhelming evidence shows that citizens do not go bankrupt due to medical costs.
You are concerned about big government? Who incidentally must be transparent.
Instead you advocate for big med/pharma, who cut service at every level, add layers of bureaucracy, continually increase costs to the individual, have no incentive to be accountable, and continually increase their profit margin.
It’s inane that you advocate for your corporate overlords.
Trump is shutting down the government because congress now has the votes to release the Epstein Files.
[QUOTE=Chick Stern;15036516]You have to question why you are against universal healthcare?
Overwhelming evidence shows that it would be much cheaper per capita.
Overwhelming evidence shows that there are better health results in virtually every category.
Overwhelming evidence shows that citizens do not go bankrupt due to medical costs.
You are concerned about big government? Who incidentally must be transparent.
Instead you advocate for big med/pharma, who cut service at every level, add layers of bureaucracy, continually increase costs to the individual, have no incentive to be accountable, and continually increase their profit margin.
It’s inane that you advocate for your corporate overlords.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Chick Stern;15036516]You have to question why you are against universal healthcare?
Overwhelming evidence shows that it would be much cheaper per capita.
Overwhelming evidence shows that there are better health results in virtually every category.
Overwhelming evidence shows that citizens do not go bankrupt due to medical costs.
You are concerned about big government? Who incidentally must be transparent.
Instead you advocate for big med/pharma, who cut service at every level, add layers of bureaucracy, continually increase costs to the individual, have no incentive to be accountable, and continually increase their profit margin.
It’s inane that you advocate for your corporate overlords.[/QUOTE]
I am assuming that you are getting your overwhelming evidence from countries like Sweden, Norway? There are several things in contrast here the US. Their education is free** - they don't pay for medical school. Are you going to tell all the US medical schools NOT to charge for med school. Good luck with that.
The average salary of a doctor in Sweden is about $125k - in the US, it's much higher. Are we going to adjust DOWNWARD all physicians' salary to fit your cheaper per capita health care costs? And if a doctor has to train 4 years undergrad, 4 years medical school, 3-7 years of residency with hundreds of thousands in school loans, who is going to want to be paid $125k in salary - NO ONE. And even if you could get some fools to agree, what? will we adjust down the salary of accountants, lawyers, engineers to match? Ludicrous.
The US is a litigious society - our doctors (in particular), healthcare providers, hospitals must protect themselves against lawsuits which costs money - this malpractice/liability insurance is expensive. They are in many cases (over) trained - OT, PT, speech therapist must have doctorates. Are you going to be able to pass laws so that people cannot sue health care providers (as I assume it is in Sweden/Norway)? Good luck with that.
Pharma spends billions in research which they try to recoup before whatever patent sunsets (and becomes a generic). The rest of the world copies much of what the US discovers and charges pennies on the dollar. Are you going to prevent Pharma from charging so much? What do you think will happen to drug research in the US? It will dry up - because there is no incentive to spend billions if you can't recoup them. Then what, we just don't have any more cancer, alzheimer's, etc. research?
You might not like the society that we live in but reality is that this is the way it is - good luck taking on educational, medical, legal, pharma to change the system
**Chrome: How much does it cost for EEA education of doctor in Sweden
AI Overview
Medical education is free of charge in Sweden for EU/EEA citizens and does not require tuition fees. This means that if you are a citizen of a country within the European Union or European Economic Area, you will not have to pay any tuition for your medical studies at Swedish universities.
Key Points:
EU/EEA Citizens Pay No Tuition: Citizens of EU/EEA countries, along with citizens of Switzerland, are exempt from tuition fees for higher education in Sweden, including medical school
[QUOTE=Chick Stern;15036516]You have to question why you are against universal healthcare?
Overwhelming evidence shows that it would be much cheaper per capita.
Overwhelming evidence shows that there are better health results in virtually every category.
Overwhelming evidence shows that citizens do not go bankrupt due to medical costs.
You are concerned about big government? Who incidentally must be transparent.
Instead you advocate for big med/pharma, who cut service at every level, add layers of bureaucracy, continually increase costs to the individual, have no incentive to be accountable, and continually increase their profit margin.
It’s inane that you advocate for your corporate overlords.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Chick Stern;15036516]You have to question why you are against universal healthcare?
Overwhelming evidence shows that it would be much cheaper per capita.
Overwhelming evidence shows that there are better health results in virtually every category.
Overwhelming evidence shows that citizens do not go bankrupt due to medical costs.
You are concerned about big government? Who incidentally must be transparent.
Instead you advocate for big med/pharma, who cut service at every level, add layers of bureaucracy, continually increase costs to the individual, have no incentive to be accountable, and continually increase their profit margin.
It’s inane that you advocate for your corporate overlords.[/QUOTE]
I am assuming that you are getting your overwhelming evidence from countries like Sweden, Norway? There are several things in contrast here the US. Their education is free** - they don't pay for medical school. Are you going to tell all the US medical schools NOT to charge for med school. Good luck with that.
The average salary of a doctor in Sweden is about $125k - in the US, it's much higher. Are we going to adjust DOWNWARD all physicians' salary to fit your cheaper per capita health care costs? And if a doctor has to train 4 years undergrad, 4 years medical school, 3-7 years of residency with hundreds of thousands in school loans, who is going to want to be paid $125k in salary - NO ONE. And even if you could get some fools to agree, what? will we adjust down the salary of accountants, lawyers, engineers to match? Ludicrous.
The US is a litigious society - our doctors (in particular), healthcare providers, hospitals must protect themselves against lawsuits which costs money - this malpractice/liability insurance is expensive. They are in many cases (over) trained - OT, PT, speech therapist must have doctorates. Are you going to be able to pass laws so that people cannot sue health care providers (as I assume it is in Sweden/Norway)? Good luck with that.
Pharma spends billions in research which they try to recoup before whatever patent sunsets (and becomes a generic). The rest of the world copies much of what the US discovers and charges pennies on the dollar. Are you going to prevent Pharma from charging so much? What do you think will happen to drug research in the US? It will dry up - because there is no incentive to spend billions if you can't recoup them. Then what, we just don't have any more cancer, alzheimer's, etc. research?
You might not like the society that we live in but reality is that this is the way it is - good luck taking on educational, medical, legal, pharma to change the system
**Chrome: How much does it cost for EEA education of doctor in Sweden
AI Overview
Medical education is free of charge in Sweden for EU/EEA citizens and does not require tuition fees. This means that if you are a citizen of a country within the European Union or European Economic Area, you will not have to pay any tuition for your medical studies at Swedish universities.
Key Points:
EU/EEA Citizens Pay No Tuition: Citizens of EU/EEA countries, along with citizens of Switzerland, are exempt from tuition fees for higher education in Sweden, including medical school
[QUOTE=rmt;15036460]None of you will address that these extensions were for a once-in-a-lifetime event and were meant to sunset (or would never have passed). Give an inch (covid) and Democrats want not a mile but eternity (permanent). This insane government spending has got to stop - not expand.
Do you ALL really think that ACA subsidies should be available without income limits? Just more insidious movement toward universal healthcare.[/QUOTE]
How can you justify the historic taxcuts as the premise for that? Drop the historic taxcuts, and you now have a point.
I noticed MAGA has not addressed the taxcuts, so lets put you on record. Do you support historic taxcuts for the rich adding 3 trillion to the debt even AFTER healthcare insurance/other social cuts including for green energy? How about 150 billion for ICE or a trillion dollars for the military?
More money for ICE wouldn't be needed if Biden didn't open up the border to millions of undocumented illegals. The more deported the better. It's not rocket science.
[QUOTE=bladefd;15036543]How can you justify the historic taxcuts as the premise for that? Drop the historic taxcuts, and you now have a point.
I noticed MAGA has not addressed the taxcuts, so lets put you on record. Do you support historic taxcuts for the rich adding 3 trillion to the debt even AFTER healthcare insurance/other social cuts including for green energy? How about 150 billion for ICE or a trillion dollars for the military?[/QUOTE]
I have stated repeatedly that I do not support deficits and every dollar saved from DOGE cuts, tariffs, etc. should go toward reducing our debt. The tax cuts have passed - they are not the subject of this government shutdown. If you want to decide what to spend money on, win elections.
I support deporting illegal aliens - they are not supposed to be here. A major part of why Trump won is because Biden opened up the border to "asylum seekers" when everyone knows the majority of them have no such claim.
[QUOTE=rmt;15036460]None of you will address that these extensions were for a once-in-a-lifetime event and were meant to sunset (or would never have passed). Give an inch (covid) and Democrats want not a mile but eternity (permanent). This insane government spending has got to stop - not expand.
[B]Do you ALL really think that ACA subsidies should be available without income limits?[/B] Just more insidious movement toward universal healthcare.[/QUOTE]
Of course not. But you need to consider the repercussions of these things for the providers too.
While the barrier of entry is certainly an issue and should be addressed on an individual standpoint, hospitals are being affected by this as much as anyone. Remember that they also have these subsidies that are now being scrutinized heavily.
Most of these are non-profit systems as well. The thought processes with all of them is how to innovate and improve the patient experience.
I know because I work with them every day. Doesn't matter if you're a doctor, nurse, Cloud engineer, help desk associate, supply chain VP. When the rug is pulled out from you when truly positive actions are being taken? Not the best thing.
That's not to say that a program should be abused but many don't know what it takes to run a healthcare system..and money is important to have it be optimal.
[QUOTE=Hey Yo;15036551]More money for ICE wouldn't be needed if Biden didn't open up the border to millions of undocumented illegals. The more deported the better. It's not rocket science.[/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/biden-immigration-program-misrepresented-online-2024-07-03/[/url]
Jeffries challenged Johnson toa debate over the shutdown. He declined. Should he have accepted?
Why does the Trump admin hate good health so much?
[QUOTE=Off the Court;15036776]Why does the Trump admin hate good health so much?[/QUOTE]Trump and the Republicans in general hate anything that Obama did. In theory it also helps with spending but with the enormous deficit spending going on it's funny how they only remember that we have a deficit problem when the spending is on something that people really need.
[url]https://x.com/ReallyAmerican1/status/1975684711180612090[/url]
MTG Blasting Republicans :roll: