tourists24
Well-Known Member
C'mon libs. Please defend this guy. Wanna hear the "facts"...
Never mentioned anything about being offensive. Just looking for libs opinions on the matter. So this is spot on? This method to pass major legislation is ok?Is this what you think is horrid?:
This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure [the Congressional Budget Office] did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. OK? So it's written to do that. In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law which said healthy people are going to pay in — you made explicit that healthy people pay in and sick people get money — it would not have passed. OK? Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to get the thing to pass. Look, I wish ... we could make it all transparent, but I'd rather have this law than not.
Seems about on the money to me. What do you find offensive?
How do you think laws are passed? Sounds accurate and truthful to me. What more would you like me to opine on?Never mentioned anything about being offensive. Just looking for libs opinions on the matter. So this is spot on? This method to pass major legislation is ok?
Admitting you purposely write a law that is vague and misleading just to get it passed is immoral.How do you think laws are passed? Sounds accurate and truthful to me. What more would you like me to opine on?
Can't speak for liberals, but I will say this method to pass legislation has been accepted or ignored for a long time. Trying to say this is only a liberal tactic is ignoring the reality of our political system.Never mentioned anything about being offensive. Just looking for libs opinions on the matter. So this is spot on? This method to pass major legislation is ok?
Gruber is a professor of economics at MIT. He got his Phd from Harvard in 1992' with his thesis entitled, "Changes in the Structure of Employer-Provider Health Insurance." He is currently a research associate at National Bureau of Economic Research and from 2003'-2006' he served as a key architect of Massachusetts health care reform otherwise known as RomneyCare.
So you still won't to argue that in 2012' election when it came to healthcare that there was any difference between the 2 choices given the voting public?
C'mon libs. Please defend this guy. Wanna hear the "facts"...
Or anyone else on here because we are probably 99% Americans and all stupid !!That's why I don't argue with you.
Or anyone else on here because we are probably 99% Americans and all stupid !!
Gruber is a professor of economics at MIT. He got his Phd from Harvard in 1992' with his thesis entitled, "Changes in the Structure of Employer-Provider Health Insurance." He is currently a research associate at National Bureau of Economic Research and from 2003'-2006' he served as a key architect of Massachusetts health care reform otherwise known as RomneyCare.
So you still won't to argue that in 2012' election when it came to healthcare that there was any difference between the 2 choices given the voting public?
Wow, he sounds really unqualified compared to his critics. Notice how his assistance with RomneyCare wasn't mentioned at all by the Right Wing Media. Wonder why? Mitt in 2016!!!
Romneycare's web site costed $5M and worked .
ACA'a website has costed ( just in Mass. ) over $250M and is still not working a year later .