Scioly.org

gyourkoshaven wrote:

gyourkoshaven wrote:Anyway, how awful is this health care bill?

Apparently it could chop like 800 billion off the deficit in 10 years.....not bad say I

There is no way imaginable that this will reduce the deficit long-term. Maybe it won't add to it for the first couple of years, but there's no way that insuring 20 million people reduces the deficit. I consider myself a leftist and this bill is crap.

Yes, but Obama needs something to give him some momentum in office, and a swing upwards in the polls.

Most people are opposed to this health care bill, so it seems illogical to me how this could help Obama. Besides, it is completely unacceptable to do something so drastic for political games.

And there is no way this will reduce the deficit, which is a whopping 12 trillion! In the first few years, taxation without any spending and Medicare cuts "save" money, but once the spending starts, get ready for deficits. Deficits can bring down a nation.

Students are citizens too. Why should a government school not have to follow the fourth amendment?

blue cobra wrote:Most people are opposed to this health care bill, so it seems illogical to me how this could help Obama. Besides, it is completely unacceptable to do something so drastic for political games.

How many of those people do you think actually know whats in the bill?

And there is no way this will reduce the deficit, which is a whopping 12 trillion! In the first few years, taxation without any spending and Medicare cuts "save" money, but once the spending starts, get ready for deficits. Deficits can bring down a nation.

The deficit is most certainly not Obama's fault, it took Bush 8 years to get us into this mess you think that Obama can get rid of it in 1? (please don't post anything about a Clinton deficit, I know he had one but it wasn't even close to what the deficit is now).
Also: "According to the Congressional Budget Office, the Senate bill will cost the U.S. government US$871-billion over 10 years. It also estimates the reforms will reduce the overall U.S. deficit by US$132-billion."

Students are citizens too. Why should a government school not have to follow the fourth amendment?

Did you miss the word "unreasonable" or something? Do you want kids to be able to bring weapons, drugs etc. Into schools simply because of the 4th amendment? Also: Research your supreme court cases-- T.L.O. vs New Jersey essentially gives schools the right to search, although not completely without reason

fmtiger124 wrote:

blue cobra wrote:Most people are opposed to this health care bill, so it seems illogical to me how this could help Obama. Besides, it is completely unacceptable to do something so drastic for political games.

How many of those people do you think actually know whats in the bill?

Uhh...I'm pretty sure that 75% of America is scared out of their minds, in fear of facing OBAMA AND HIS DEATH PANELS!!!!!!

fmtiger124 wrote:

blue cobra wrote:Most people are opposed to this health care bill, so it seems illogical to me how this could help Obama. Besides, it is completely unacceptable to do something so drastic for political games.

How many of those people do you think actually know whats in the bill?

And there is no way this will reduce the deficit, which is a whopping 12 trillion! In the first few years, taxation without any spending and Medicare cuts "save" money, but once the spending starts, get ready for deficits. Deficits can bring down a nation.

The deficit is most certainly not Obama's fault, it took Bush 8 years to get us into this mess you think that Obama can get rid of it in 1? (please don't post anything about a Clinton deficit, I know he had one but it wasn't even close to what the deficit is now).
Also: "According to the Congressional Budget Office, the Senate bill will cost the U.S. government US$871-billion over 10 years. It also estimates the reforms will reduce the overall U.S. deficit by US$132-billion."

I'm not saying that the deficit is Obama's fault at all (Mostly because we had a surplus at the end of The Clinton Administration), but there's no way that insuring 30 million more people saves us money in the long run. It's like saying you will have more cookies in 10 years if you give 10 of them away, and Mommy isn't making any more for you. Now I am insured, so insuring the poor isn't my top priority, especially if you're increasing the deficit. However, if this had a strong public option, which would reduce my costs, then I'd be fine with it. But in general, increasing the deficit to do something that won't effect 3/4 of the country isn't worth it.

Students are citizens too. Why should a government school not have to follow the fourth amendment?

Did you miss the word "unreasonable" or something? Do you want kids to be able to bring weapons, drugs etc. Into schools simply because of the 4th amendment? Also: Research your supreme court cases-- T.L.O. vs New Jersey essentially gives schools the right to search, although not completely without reason

I thought the Constitution said that only Presidents could be searched for weapons and drugs...

lol to the first part....(I can't believe people are enough of nutjobs to believe that)

Second part, I wasn't talking to you however its not the insuring more people part of the bill that will help cut it (I think theres a way that does but I don't fully understand it myself)

Third part: ..................................

Was a failed lol.

I'm just saying that it is physically impossible to have higher expenses than income and have a profit. Simple rule of business.

Healthcare: I think that Obama has the right idea (of reforming healthcare), but the actual bill isn't going to do much to slash costs for those who are already insured.

fmtiger124 wrote:

blue cobra wrote:Students are citizens too. Why should a government school not have to follow the fourth amendment?

Did you miss the word "unreasonable" or something? Do you want kids to be able to bring weapons, drugs etc. Into schools simply because of the 4th amendment? Also: Research your supreme court cases-- T.L.O. vs New Jersey essentially gives schools the right to search, although not completely without reason

I'm sort of on the fence about this. I mean, it's definitely not right for a teacher to randomly stop students and search them for contraband, but I think that if the teacher has a solid reason to suspect a student of wrongdoing, they should be allowed to search them. Like if a teacher stops (uh, random name...) Wendy just because she "looks guilty" and searches her backpack and finds cigarettes, that can't be used against Wendy because it was an unreasonable search. but if a teacher sees smoke coming out of the bathroom, goes in, sees only Wendy, and then searches her backpack and finds cigarettes, that would be a reasonable search because the teacher had a good reason (i.e. smoke and Wendy being the only one there) to believe that she was guilty of something. But then we get into arguing about what a "solid reason" to search is.

Of course I don't want to kids to bring weapons and drugs into school. I wasn't trying to say that you should need a warrant, but I don't think you should be able to strip search someone because someone who you think they're friends with stole things out of the locker room. If there is reason to believe they have the items (eg, someone said they saw them hand something that could be the items in question to this person) then that's a totally different. I think I agree with AlphaTauri on this one.

Not only is the deficit "reduction" for only the very beginning, but it also relies on a little magic math. They say they're going to cut payment to doctors, but they always reverse that at the last second.

Ah, people who disagree with you are stupid and ignorant. I see

For clarity, lets separate "deficit" from "debt". The deficit being the money each year that the government spends but doesn't have. The debt would be total deficits from all previous years. Bush didn't get to twelve trillion all by himself, no matter how much you like to blame him for all the world's woes. War spending made his deficits too high. But Obama's are astronomical. Take a look at this fine visual. It translates deficits to miles, and years into hours. If Bush was driving 63 mph, Obama is driving 174 mph.