CNBC - Young Obamacare Supporter Whining - Told Ya So

beezzer

Krazysh0t
Great another thread where old people can "tsk tsk" at the younger people for the problems that they [older people] created...

Hasn't that always been the case?

I mean, name me one time where the younger people created a problem that the older folks are now facing.

Ok, besides "twerking".

You mean like electing Obama - TWICE! I'd say the "older generation" is taking it on the chin for their lack of foresight!

Awolscout
It is too much. Health coverage should be completely free. It's pretty much a basic human right at this point, like internet access, a drivers license, college education etc etc etc. Just because these concepts didn't exist about 300 years ago doesn't mean they shouldn't apply. I mean personally I am so done with people acting like it's a ridiculous or asinine concept that people want what they deserve. You know like the right to living? Oh wait I forgot the right to living only extends to fetuses my bad I take back everything I said we should just charge out the ass for insurance to make sure only the upper class and the people who are actually lower class but think they're upper class because they're house poor get to enjoy things like knowing if you have cancer or not.

Also OP shouldn't you be up in arms about just how much you ARE paying? I don't know about you but that seems a little exorbitant to me.

Health care is a service that is provided to you by another human being who goes to school for years in order to learn his or her art. But if you make this skill a "right," you are basically demanding that all health care practitioners be enslaved by the state to service you at your every beck and whim.

We used to have a class of people who did this once upon a time. They were called slaves. The English Empire spent itself trying to stamp the practice out, and America actually fought one of history's bloodiest wars in which it was one of the central issues.

But you think we should go back to it?

Krazysh0t
reply to post by beezzer

 

Why can't these older people understand how hard it is for the younger people? They were that age before. They should remember how hard it is to get by and with the rising costs of living, they should be able to extrapolate how much harder it is to get by than it was when they were that age.

I'm happy to answer that question... because when WE were YOUR age, we were smart enough to know a few things that your generation can't seem to grasp:

1.) NOTHING is free!
2.) You are ENTITLED to NOTHING!
3.) Politicians LIE to get your vote and don't care about you!
4.) There is NO substitute for HARD WORK and PERSONAL SACRIFICE!

As a result, we behaved accordingly. We did NOT vote for handouts that we believed were "free". We were smart enough to realize that the only thing we were entitled to was to WORK HARD and EARN a living! We knew that a bigger government was a BAD government. Your generation does the exact OPPOSITE and then bitches about it! GROW UP!

damwel
Yes gullible stupidity is ageless, like you elected Bush twice or that you can't figure out for yourself that these are lies about obamacare made up to try and limit the success of a winning president.

LOL! Keep fooling yourself.

Oh looky, a unicorn flying over - farting rainbows on everyone. YAY OBAMA!!!

Bush has nothing to do with the conversation. But thank you for the predictable dissembling. And your "Winning president" is enjoying his lowest approval rating and highest DIS-approval rating EVER!

So, in essence, you are right - "Gullible stupidity is ageless" - you've just provided your own best evidence.

reply to post by kozmo


All of that is lies because welfare has existed in this country since the 30's. Therefore the entitlement mentality didn't popup with my generation. It started with yours or your parents' generation.

reply to post by kozmo


Yes! We understand. Really. We've been there and done that, but we persevered, worked hard, and moved up. We had patience and understood that Rome wasn't built in a day. We never expected to just step into the same standard of living our parents had and we listened when they told us about gathering cans and bottles to sell to just have enough extra money to buy that rare hamburger or other small luxury and understood that would be our lives, too, for a few years.

Krazysh0t
reply to post by kozmo

 

All of that is lies because welfare has existed in this country since the 30's. Therefore the entitlement mentality didn't popup with my generation. It started with yours or your parents' generation.

But it used to be something to be ashamed of to live on public assistance so people got off it as quickly as possible.

I'd say what's really missing is the shame. These days, we live in a the new "non-judgmental" society where things that used to be shameful are no longer allowed to be shameful, so it's perfectly OK to live as a societal leach for all your life and teach your children that's OK, too.

Krazysh0t
reply to post by kozmo

 

All of that is lies because welfare has existed in this country since the 30's. Therefore the entitlement mentality didn't popup with my generation. It started with yours or your parents' generation.

You're not paying attention - A seeming curse upon your generation! What percentage of the population was on welfare in the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's versus TODAY! And HOW LONG did people take welfare in comparison. I'm NOT at all interested in your whining hypothecations either - LOOK IT UP!

There is a difference in offering help to those who need it (Why welfare was created) and the creation of entitled underclass who live their lives on it!

Again, GROW UP!

ketsuko

Krazysh0t
reply to post by kozmo

 

All of that is lies because welfare has existed in this country since the 30's. Therefore the entitlement mentality didn't popup with my generation. It started with yours or your parents' generation.

But it used to be something to be ashamed of to live on public assistance so people got off it as quickly as possible.

I'd say what's really missing is the shame. These days, we live in a the new "non-judgmental" society where things that used to be shameful are no longer allowed to be shameful, so it's perfectly OK to live as a societal leach for all your life and teach your children that's OK, too.

Your last sentence betrays the crux of the issue. People my generation, if they have kids, are too young to be able to teach their children anything about welfare. Most people my age's children are pre-10 years old. The people teaching their children the welfare mentality are people my age's parents, you guys. Seriously, this is why I hate the blame game here. YOUNG PEOPLE AREN'T SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WELFARE MENTALITY! Own up to your own mistakes too.

reply to post by kozmo


Grow up? Ok now I am one post away from never responding to you again. You know NOTHING about me, what I do, how I earn my money, and how I live. NEVER speak to me about that again unless I volunteer that information. Just so you get the picture, I'm not on any sort of entitlement.

Krazysh0t
Great another thread where old people can "tsk tsk" at the younger people for the problems that they [older people] created...

Just quoting this again, because now I'm seriously annoyed at some of the posters in this thread. This has literally become a "bash the young people" thread.

All I am reading is "He said She said, younger this, older that"

This administration has the older and younger generations bickering like hens at a sunday brunch.

Older Gen: Instead of "pointing a finger" and quacking like the silver backs you are. Why don't you show us "youngins" instead of squacking off at the mouth. Mentor, instead of blathering at the jaws.

STAND the fetch up and do something, would be better late than never, since you perpetually watched the degragation of a civilised nation run up sh~its creek whilst complaining about the younger and "got" while the getting was good.

Younger Gen: Knock it the fetch off!

reply to post by Krazysh0t


It wasn't aimed at you. I'm probably close to your generation than you know.

The "your" is largely rhetorical.

I'm just going to leave this here, since all the elderly conservatives like to throw the blame on the younger generations that are just too lazy to work.

Some conservative critics of federal social programs, including leading presidential candidates, are sounding an alarm that the United States is rapidly becoming an “entitlement society” in which social programs are undermining the work ethic and creating a large class of Americans who prefer to depend on government benefits rather than work. A new CBPP analysis of budget and Census data, however, shows that more than 90 percent of the benefit dollars that entitlement and other mandatory programs[1] spend go to assist people who are elderly, seriously disabled, or members of working households — not to able-bodied, working-age Americans who choose not to work.

Oh, wow, that kind of flies in the face of the entire argument.


Let's read further, though:

The claim behind these critiques is clear: federal spending on entitlements and other mandatory programs through which individuals receive benefits is promoting laziness, creating a dependent class of Americans who are losing the desire to work and would rather collect government benefits than find a job.

Sounds about right, almost like what the "elders" in this thread have been saying.

Such beliefs are starkly at odds with the basic facts regarding social programs, the analysis finds. Federal budget and Census data show that, in 2010, 91 percentof the benefit dollars from entitlement and other mandatory programs went to the elderly (people 65 and over), the seriously disabled, and members of working households. People who are neither elderly nor disabled — and do not live in a working household — received only 9 percent of the benefits.

Moreover, the vast bulk of that 9 percent goes for medical care, unemployment insurance benefits (which individuals must have a significant work history to receive), Social Security survivor benefits for the children and spouses of deceased workers, and Social Security benefits for retirees between ages 62 and 64. Seven out of the 9 percentage points go for one of these four purposes.

www.cbpp.org...

Oh... Wait.. So where is the entitlement society?

It's all a numbers game the Government is playing. Just like the unemployment numbers. The vast majority of people who receive benefits are able-bodied, working Americans. What does that tell you? The cost of living in America is completely unrealistic for most of the middle / lower class. The dollar is being devalued, very slowly, which has led to the recent hardships. I believe the housing crisis of 2008/2009 was just a ploy to give the public a reason for the "recession," other than the Governments inability to balance a budget.

Just my 2 cents.

Peace.

Krazysh0t
reply to post by kozmo

 

Grow up? Ok now I am one post away from never responding to you again. You know NOTHING about me, what I do, how I earn my money, and how I live. NEVER speak to me about that again unless I volunteer that information. Just so you get the picture, I'm not on any sort of entitlement.

The term "Grow up" can have additional meaning beyond the obviously chronological connotation. Think about it...

And I never accused you of receiving any type of government handout.

reply to post by sulaw


I agree with much of what you post. This is no way is isolated to "younger versus older". As other's have pointed out, today's youngsters learned about entitlements from their parents. So obviously the "takers" have been around for awhile. Like any problem, it compounds itself as generations progress.

What I do take issue with is your premise that the "older" (I see it as "wiser") generation has done nothing about it; haven't "mentored". I'm sorry, but we tried. We tried in 2008 when the youngsters where worshiping Obama, drinking the Kool Aid and taking the bait; hook, line and sinker. We tried when Obamacare was being debated and shoved down the country's throat in 2009 demanding that we slow down a bit and REALLY THINK this through. We tried in 2012 by talking about how this administration had not lived up to the hype and provided supporting evidence that the current agenda was leading us the wrong way down a one-way street. We also tried, and continue to try, at every point in between; NDAA, Benghazi, Fast-N-Furious, NSA, IRS...

However, I DON'T blame it entirely on the younger generation - they were easily duped and too stubborn to do anything about it. I blame it on the concept of selling and buying votes in exchange for favors and benefits and those who would so easily selfishly sell-out in order to get something for "Free" - at ANY age. So, let's see what the youngsters do now... let's see if they have gained any wisdom and experience from this exercise. In the last elections, they sided with the "Gibmedats" and "mines" which has led us to where we are today. Have they matured enough from this experience to recognize the TRUTHs in life:

1.) NOTHING is free!
2.) You are ENTITLED to NOTHING!
3.) Politicians LIE to get your vote and don't care about you!
4.) There is NO substitute for HARD WORK and PERSONAL SACRIFICE!

We shall see...

These days, I include many government employees in the taker category as much as I do entitlement recipients, particularly the ones represented by powerful unions. They have powerful election apparatuses that elect the people who then sit across the table from them and bargain new contract terms that have steadily become more abusive of the general private sector taxpayer who has no representative in this equation and look at how many municipalities, and even states, are now going bankrupt because of this.

But ask any of them, and they're entitled to their fat, abusive retirements and terms for life because they made corrupt deals, and you and I who had no part of the deal are beholden to pay for them until they die no matter what.

QUANTUMGR4V17Y
I'm just going to leave this here, since all the elderly conservatives like to throw the blame on the younger generations that are just too lazy to work.

Some conservative critics of federal social programs, including leading presidential candidates, are sounding an alarm that the United States is rapidly becoming an “entitlement society” in which social programs are undermining the work ethic and creating a large class of Americans who prefer to depend on government benefits rather than work. A new CBPP analysis of budget and Census data, however, shows that more than 90 percent of the benefit dollars that entitlement and other mandatory programs[1] spend go to assist people who are elderly, seriously disabled, or members of working households — not to able-bodied, working-age Americans who choose not to work.

Oh, wow, that kind of flies in the face of the entire argument.


Let's read further, though:

The claim behind these critiques is clear: federal spending on entitlements and other mandatory programs through which individuals receive benefits is promoting laziness, creating a dependent class of Americans who are losing the desire to work and would rather collect government benefits than find a job.

Sounds about right, almost like what the "elders" in this thread have been saying.

Such beliefs are starkly at odds with the basic facts regarding social programs, the analysis finds. Federal budget and Census data show that, in 2010, 91 percentof the benefit dollars from entitlement and other mandatory programs went to the elderly (people 65 and over), the seriously disabled, and members of working households. People who are neither elderly nor disabled — and do not live in a working household — received only 9 percent of the benefits.

Moreover, the vast bulk of that 9 percent goes for medical care, unemployment insurance benefits (which individuals must have a significant work history to receive), Social Security survivor benefits for the children and spouses of deceased workers, and Social Security benefits for retirees between ages 62 and 64. Seven out of the 9 percentage points go for one of these four purposes.

www.cbpp.org...

Oh... Wait.. So where is the entitlement society?

It's all a numbers game the Government is playing. Just like the unemployment numbers. The vast majority of people who receive benefits are able-bodied, working Americans. What does that tell you? The cost of living in America is completely unrealistic for most of the middle / lower class. The dollar is being devalued, very slowly, which has led to the recent hardships. I believe the housing crisis of 2008/2009 was just a ploy to give the public a reason for the "recession," other than the Governments inability to balance a budget.

Just my 2 cents.

Peace.

I see where you're going, but I have to take exception with a few of the quotes...

Regarding "Social Programs" and the risk of creating an "Entitlement Society"... TOO LATE! We have an ever entitled under-class. This underclass is not denoted by their age, as it sweeps across multiple generations. As a Conservative Libertarian, it is these social programs putting an incredible amount of pressure on tax-payers that prevents small businesses from hiring, expanding or even just starting up! That has an incredible impact on the young, able-bodied willing to work - there's NO jobs! Why? Because the engine of job creation - 80% of all new jobs are created by small businesses and start-ups - has been effectively shut down via over-regulation and over-taxation (BOTH liberal hallmarks!)!

The second quote regarding "laziness" isn't entirely incorrect, but it is a non sequitur fallacy and cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. The issues are not mutually inclusive and do not have a necessarily corellational relationship to the premise. The statement, on its own, is factual. In fact, there have been thousands of examples posted online; Obamamoney video, Obamphone video, Surferdude on foodstamps, Welfare mom "someone has to pay", Welfare mom "more kids for more money"... Google them.

The third quote is simply an apple to oranges comparison, as we'll break down. First, let's actually separate real "Entitlements" from "Welfare". I know the liberal MSM likes to lump them altogether, because it hides the vote-buying handouts, but it is a lie. First of all, there are only 2 programs that US Citizens are entitled to: Social Security and Medicare. Want to know why? WE PAID INTO THEM ALL OF OUR WORKING LIVES! These programs are designed to pay out after paying in. The rest is "Welfare" - there due to the generosity of society to agree to sacrifice income in exchange for the provision of basic needs by the government. NO ONE is entitled to them. They're there because, as citizen tax-payers, we are compassionate enough to provide it.

The two largest "Social programs" are SS and Medicare - BY DESIGN. They are supposed to be SELF FUNDED (Why they are no longer is a whole different thread and topic!). So, by lumping them into the WELFARE programs, you get to hide the OUTRAGEOUS extortion of money from the tax-payers that fund the actual welfare programs. And to be fair, there are many people who use these programs responsibly - and many who leech and coast for free.

reply to post by ketsuko


You have just entered into the: "The reason why Public Unions should not be permitted" territory! Feel free to file it under: "Conflict of interest".

I need to address this concept that no one has a right to "healthcare." This is so very wrong on so many levels, but is a direct consequence of the false paradigm in which we live today.

First, the right to life is dependent on the right to healthcare. Period.

Second, yes, everyone (including doctors and other healthcare providers) deserves a fair wage for their labor... however, it is the hyper-regulated system that FORCES us to depend on someone else for our healthcare. We have every right to treat our health as necessary and with the bounty of the earth. But that right has been taken away from us. We're not the ones demanding that someone else provide our healthcare needs, it is the government denying our right to take care of ourselves and demanding that others provide our healthcare needs.

Third, if we don't have the right to healthcare, then not one red cent should be collected nor expended by government for healthcare for ANYONE in any way, shape or form. We can start by stopping subsidizing (by 75%) health insurance for federal employees. As well as defunding Medicare and Medicaid. (Active military would be the exception: like work animals, we would have to keep them healthy to get the job done). Next, eliminate all health-oriented federal agencies -- no more Center for Disease Control, no more National Institute of Health, no more Food and Drug Administration, etc. Of course that would also mean no more taxpayer dollars for medical research of any kind that take from everyone to benefit the chosen few who can afford medical care. That would also put an end to special sweetheart patent deals for Big Pharma. And, of course, no more taxpayer funded student loans, grants, etc., for medical training for anyone.

I could go on, but I think the point is made. Taxpayers contribute an awful lot of money for healthcare that fewer and fewer are able to benefit from. If it's not a right, then it has to stop. Completely. If health care is not a right, then the "haves" sure don't have any right to take from the "have nots" for their healthcare. Redistribution of health is even more reprehensible than redistribution of wealth.

Finally, we've been conditioned to believe that our only choices are a public, single-payer (universal) healthcare system, or a private, multi-payer (insurance) healthcare system. It's bunk. We have some of the greatest minds in the world and we can make it whatever we want. I would like to think that we could and would work together for the greater good and come up with a system that benefits all, without stepping on anyone's toes, and giving everyone the freedom to choose what works best for them. Australia is an example of a healthcare system comprising both a public and private option. If they can do better, so can we.

Health Care in Austraila

The Australian
Health Care System