Return to CreateDebate.comjaded • Join this debate community

Joe_Cavalry All Day Every Day


Debate Info

34
22
I've always thought that Wait...., What? No!
Debate Score:56
Arguments:39
Total Votes:61
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 I've always thought that (22)
 
 Wait...., What? No! (17)

Debate Creator

joecavalry(39806) pic



Obamacare: a major change for the country, but NOT for public opinion

I've always thought that

Side Score: 34
VS.

Wait...., What? No!

Side Score: 22

Do Americans just deep down hate to be governed? (Which wouldn't be surprising, given that most people who live here came here to get out from under the control of some other government or church or caste system).

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-why-is-conservative-media- crushing-liberal-media-2010-3#ixzz0jguOqt7s

Side: I've always thought that
5 points

Hello Joe,

Americans like to govern. And they certainly despise the governance of the opposition.

It is like this: We are sovereign, but they are not.

Side: I've always thought that

Those rat bastards ;)

The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters.

Side: I've always thought that

Odd, how many people are opposed of the newly passed health care bill?

Side: I've always thought that
1 point

Yes Obama has delivered the change he promised but has he changed the minds of most Americans? apparently not. The real proof will come this November when America will vote whether or not they like the change Obama has brought. He has not persuaded me that this change is good and I will vote accordingly; I want my country back and government out of my life.

Side: I've always thought that
victor01(146) Disputed
1 point

"Yes Obama has delivered the change he promised"

Really since when? Didn't he promise to lower taxes? Take troops out of Iraq? Afghanistan?

Yes he said he would help the poor, but instead he is making America all poor except all the advisor's that work for him who are getting doubled wages.

Sure this is change from what Bush had, but its not the change he promised.

Side: Wait...., What? No!
gcomeau(536) Disputed
2 points

FYI, he has lowered taxes. Remember that stimulus bill everyone was screaming and ranting about? Several hundred BILLION of it was lowered taxes. It was one of the largest tax cuts in history. Where were you when this happened?

And Iraq troop levels are falling and continuing to fall on a trajectory towards a planned withdrawal date.

And he did not promise to get out of Afghanistan. He campaigned on INCREASING troop levels in Afghanistan. Which he has done.

etc...

Basically, you're wrong about everything. Which is impressive, because you'd think you'd get something right just by sheer chance.

Side: Wait...., What? No!
jstantall(178) Disputed
1 point

Context is important. He did promise change but he never said what kind of change. The passing of this bill has most certainly brought change but not the kind we wanted. But again, he never told us what kind of change. But that's always been his strength. He talks a good talk and makes everyone think he is on their side, that's how he got elected. But if you listen carefully, he never really says anything, it just sounds like it.

Side: I've always thought that

Of course it is a major change for the country - anybody who would dispute that is either an idiot or a liberal.

Side: I've always thought that
2 points

The fact that a large number of people think that this IS nationalized health care... something it does not even remotely resemble ... is all the demonstration necessary that they are not equipped to judge whether they want nationalized health care.

You have to know what it is before you can say if it's a good or bad thing.

Side: Wait...., What? No!
jstantall(178) Disputed
1 point

OK help me with this one; how is the federal government providing health insurance to millions of Americans not nationalized health care. I could say that if this was done on the state level or by a municipality but it was done on the federal level. This is the federal government getting involved in health care, not the regulating of it but the providing of goods and services. It's like an umpire stepping up to the plate to bat. Everyone in that ballpark would be up in arms. The government is a regulatory office, it is not a player in the game.

Or to put it another way; If the federal government starts providing health insurance they have just entered the health care business and if they entered it, because of their size, the have just nationalized it. Meaning it's being provided on a national level.

Side: I've always thought that
gcomeau(536) Disputed
2 points

Nationalized health care is when the government takes over the provision of care. As in, it nationalizes the doctors and hospitals such as the NHS system in Britain.

Last time I checked the health care system in the US was still very much private sector, with the exception of some VA facilities.

And health insurance is still mostly provided through the private sector as well, with the exception of the VA and medicare, etc... and this bill did not expand those either. In fact the GOP was screaming about the bill killing Grandma because it tries to REDUCE medicare outlays to reign in spending.

This bill isn't even vaguely related to nationalized health care, or nationalized health insurance. If it was the latter, it would work a hell of a lot better than it's going to. But it's not.

Side: Wait...., What? No!
Mahollinder(898) Disputed
1 point

OK help me with this one; how is the federal government providing health insurance to millions of Americans not nationalized health care

The federal government isn't providing any insurance coverage for any Americans outside of our representatives. That was the point of the Public Option, which doesn't exist anymore. And a Public Insurance Option isn't "nationalized health care".

Side: Wait...., What? No!
1 point

This country is a democracy, Obama and his plans are socialist. Nationalized health care for one would increase our taxes greatly,which by the way do not need to go any higher. Our national debt is currently over $12 trillion. If someone got cancer, they wouldn't be able to get treatment soon enough to cure or slow down the cancer. They would have to be put on a waiting list and pray to god that they can make it. Furthermore, America has one of the best health care programs in the world. People from all over the place come to America to get cancer treatment or surgery. Nationalized health care will get rid of all the top doctors because they are not going to want to get paid low government controlled wages.

Side: Wait...., What? No!
1 point

That's weird, because I found this one link

And CNN just said 53% don't want the bill repealed.

Could it be Conservatives have once again just been pandering to the extremes of their party? And that people really do want healthcare reform?

Say it isn't so joe.

Side: Wait...., What? No!
jstantall(178) Disputed
2 points

It's all about demographics. Who you ask and what you ask.

Side: I've always thought that
wolfbite(432) Disputed
2 points

It was never people acting out against health care reform, it was how much government involvement would be added that people had issues over. According to Ramussen about 55% want it repealed.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2010/55_favor_repeal_of_health_care_bill

As for your link, "In the latest three-day rolling average, 83% of Democrats, 47% of independents, and 14% of Republicans approve of the job Obama is doing as president. Over the course of the prior week (March 15-21), the president averaged 81% approval among Democrats, 43% from independents, and 13% from Republicans"

That's not exactly much of a jump. The 4% increase in Independents is rather interesting but seeing as approval tends to change by a few percentages a day and it still falls within the margin of error it does not mean all that much.

Side: I've always thought that