Bio not provided
What a pile of garbage. First of all, no one is holding a gun to your head, taxes are part of living in a civilized society. It's in the Constitution.
Further, you're looking at the entire issue from your own selfish point of view, without considering who get Medicaid- almost half are children. 10% are elderly, 15% are disabled.
These people don't get the best care in the world, because that's only available to the people who can afford it. But they do get care, and that's the important part. It's cheaper to treat sick people in a doctor's office than in an emergency room.
The states that have expanded Medicaid through the ACA are already seeing savings from covering more people and they don't have hospitals in rural areas closing because they can't afford to cover the bills for people who have no safety net.
So stop thinking of yourself, and what's good for you,and think about other people who aren't as lucky as you are.
1 day, 9 hours ago on The Paradigm Shift: Medicaid Expansion Isn’t Moral, It’s Theft (Video)
@tessaprn The ACA is a federal law passed by Congress and upheld by the Supreme Court.
6 months, 4 weeks ago on Conversation @ http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119011/map-how-much-24-states-lost-refusing-expand-medicaid
@tessaprn You might want to read the Constitution. There's this little thing in there called the Supremacy Clause that states that federal law is the "Supreme Law of the land".
7 months ago on Conversation @ http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119011/map-how-much-24-states-lost-refusing-expand-medicaid
@wareagle82 The ACA is paid for by an increase in capital gains taxes on people making over $400,000 a year, they're taxing medical device companies and they're reducing payments to hospitals.
That's how it's paid for.
How did Bush pay for Medicare Part D, when all the Republicans voted to pass it? He didn't- we borrowed the money. How did Bush pay for the two wars we got into? He didn't- he kept war spending off the budget and borrowed from the Chinese. He also cut taxes twice- but never reduced spending to make up for the revenue losses.
Why is it people like "wareagle82" are never around bitching like this when a Republican is spending money like a drunken sailor, but let a Democrat get into office and all of a sudden debt and deficit are a huge issue?
7 months, 2 weeks ago on Conversation @ http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119011/map-how-much-24-states-lost-refusing-expand-medicaid
@neelysusan "less than stellar care" is not worse than no care at all. Imagine watching a child die from a tooth infection that could have been solved with a round of cheap antibiotics? That's not a "natural death" by any stretch of the imagination.
Imagine having to take care of your 85 year old mother with Alzheimers, with no assistance?
And you're conflating Medicare and Medicaid, they are two different programs, not to mention that Medicare does have very efficient case management, something not always found with private insurance companies.
1 year, 3 months ago on Conversation @ http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115778/medicaid-expansion-prospects-may-be-brightening-holdout-states
@martinspribble @AlbertJ Probably not a bad idea. I pictured an endless thread with Albert J posting blather day after day.
2 years, 5 months ago on Yes, Another Post About Atheism
@AlbertJ Albert, the universe, the earth, the sun, all existed before your sky fairy did. Billions of planets, suns, galaxies, billions of years in existence, and you think someone invented by humans that has only been around 6000 years (other deities have been around longer than yours, by the way, but that doesn't make them any more real) created us?
Keep writing new posts and ignoring the replies. I'm sure Martin is enjoying the added traffic to his site.
@AlbertJ You don't seem to understand what science is, Albert. How can a very broad field of study be "proof that God is"? What proof, other than your undying declarations, exists?
What do monkeys have to do with anything? Put a bunch of human infants or a bunch of rocks in a room with typewriters and you'd get the same result- nothing. What does that prove? You see, scientists propose hypotheses, and then look for proof that the hypotheses are true.
You have said that god exists, so how will you go about proving it to us?
People like you claimed the sun revolved around the earth two thousand years ago and when scientists took measurements and proved that it was actually the other way around, the religionists burned them at the stake.
You claim that it is impossible for darkness to beat light, yet even with billions of stars in our galaxy, space is dark and empty. Impossible for randomness and chaos to exist, yet one only has to look at a nebula where new stars are born or a black hole where they go to die to see that is not true.
You're flailing around, throwing words and phrases out that have no meaning. No coherence, one could say.
@AlbertJ You, like many others of the religious sects around the world, are deliberately ignorant of science and therefore it appears magical to you. It's been like this since the beginning of civilization.
Break out of that ignorance, Albert, and do some reading. Why are you so afraid?
@AlbertJ Albert, that's easy- caring is a natural part of survival of the species. Even spiders care for their young once they hatch from the egg sac.
And you seem to be avoiding all my replies and instead posting new comments to avoid them. Pretty obvious.
@AlbertJ What if the universe just happened as physicists say, Albert? The laws of science exist without god, and theories like gravity and evolution exist with quantifiable proof without the need of an imaginary being to give them weight.
Why would religionists call what they have "faith"? Because there is no proof of the existence of gods, and you need "faith" to believe in an imaginary being, just as children believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.
God didn't create man in his own image- man created gods in his thousands of years ago, to explain things that science explains these days.
Your virgin daughter gets pregnant? A god turned into an angel and the immaculate conception was born (science knows that there's no such thing). Big flood, millions die? God got mad at people and decided to kill them all (nice guy!). Cities crumble and burn in an earthquake? God the murderous strikes again. Human's have always ascribed mean and petty tyrannical temperaments to gods, your chiristian god is certainly no different
@AlbertJ @Dubravko @deityshmeity No one here except you thinks we are the center of the universe, Albert. And I don't believe anyone here has stated that the only state of being is one of chaos. Obviously, society plays a part in reducing the chaos.
You certainly don't need a belief in a god or gods to appreciate life, either. Not sure where all this crap is coming from, except from a place of deep fear.
Why are you afraid of atheism, Albert?
@AlbertJ I can't read this post, there's so much straw flying around. Albert, you sound very confused and unsure about your own faith, and you come to this forum to project your insecurities on the atheists who post here.
I suggest you spend some time reflecting on why it's so important to you to put other people down to make yourself feel better about your own shortcomings.
@AlbertJ If scientists want to study the brain, they study the brain, Albert. Your brain is the source of your "transmissions" -a combination of chemicals and electrical impulses , and you can't turn it off because if the brain is not functioning, neither is anything else.
@AlbertJ No one needs to "believe" in gravity or math, as both are easily proven- you can pretend that gravity doesn't exist, but step out of a 2nd floor window and gravity will prove that it does indeed exist. 2+2 will always equal 4, no matter what your gods say.
I really don't understand the need of religionists like Albert above to assert so many strawmen to atheists- where did Martin or any other atheist state that we think we are the center of the universe?
We're not the source of our own thoughts because we can't turn them off "at will" like a transmitter?
Here's a clue Albert, human beings aren't transmitters that can be turned off and on at the flip of a switch. A transmitter is an inanimate object, controlled by electricity and that "magical" switch.
We are here because we evolved, just as millions of other species did. We are part and parcel of this ecosystem, no one put us here or gave us life.
The god of your dreams may equal love to you, but all I see from religionists like you, Albert, is hate and intolerance. The sooner we rid the world of gods, the better off we will all be.