[quote=Cannon Shell]
But you keep on believing verbatim everything that politicians tell you. They would never lead you astray...[/QUOTE

I'm not the one who only quotes conservative WSJ op-ed pieces :rolleyes:

I dont need to make a case. It is painfully obvious that you view anything Obama through rose colored glasses. You want to make him out to be what you view yourself to be, center-right. But he isnt and really if you are seriously onboard with his agenda then you arent either.

It is ok to come out of the political closet. You and Arlen Specter will have something in common...

[quote=Riot]Do the facts trip you up?

If you dont agree with something said go right ahead and break it down why it is wrong.

You just keep being the only one to "see what's really happening" ;)

[quote=Cannon Shell]You first. You can use facts, too (but please, someone else having the same opinion as you do doesn't make something "factual" :D ) And free to use a response other than, "I don't like what what said, so it's bs because ... well, it is! And one is an idiot if they can't see that it's bs! "

I'm done :D

In the case of me versus you, that is true.

But seriously go back to the 1st post of this thread and tell me why I am wrong? I did the editorializing by the way so you cant knock the poor saps from the WSJ.

Centrist? He's a Maoist.

[quote=Riot]The problem is that you really dont have an opinion other than to blindly follow Obama. You are the Dee Tee version of Robert Gibbs.

[quote=Cannon Shell]WOW...that musta hurt!

Look out! They are coming to get you! To arms!

Can you argue that the Student Loan program wasn't in need of a complete takeover from it's current state?

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/cr...lted/19417573/

uhh the president did want a public option. he asked for it especially at first and then backed off when the SENATE wouldnt approve a public option. You just proved he's governing from the left, lefty.

[quote=Riot]Thank God.

Thanks for commenting on my question.

It such a good bill it should have been pass on its own - oh wait the Heath Bill needed the "savings" in the SL Program to make it pass the smell of deficit reduction.
:rolleyes:

Yes. That was some time ago, though, right?

Because then the Senate and House each passed their own versions of healthcare reform.

Then the House voted upon and approved the Senate version, with reconcilation measures. Then the bill with reconciliation measures went back to the Senate.

Then the Senate Paralimentarian did find a couple things that sent it back to the House.

At that point, there were definitively enough House votes for a public option, and there definitively enough Senate votes for a public option (for when they got the bill back again) In the two weeks leading up to the reconcilation voting process, the progressive Dems pushed hard for a public option, and Obama told them to not put it back in there, even though the votes were clearly and easily there when simple majority was counted in the Senate (and the House version had already passed with a public option intact)

So what was passed for healthcare reform isn't even as "left" as what the Republicans presented, when they countered Clinton's healthcare reform package, and isn't even as "left" as what Richard Nixon proposed when he was President.

And Obama, when the votes were clearly there, for a second time backed off on the public option.

Doesn't seem so, when looking at the facts.

As one who had accumulated many student loans over their life, it was always ridiculous, to me, to have to borrow from the government, but have to go through a private bank to do so, and have that private bank just fill out the paperwork and collect service fees, then immediately sell off my loans back to a consolidation holder or the government.

I guess some are angry the middlemen banks, who essentially have been making a rather generous profit for nothing much other than doing a bit of paperwork, are now cut out of the gravy train?

The banks were taking no risk - they were loaning government money, the loans were insured by the government, and the payments went back to the government. They were simply a profit-taking middle man.

Obama cutting government waste and streamlining a massive government program - that's something to get angry about or disagree with?

[quote=timmgirvan]I guess only if one thinks Chuck's political takes are right on ;)

when did Obama or anyone else for that matter cut any waste or streamline anything to do with government? answer: never

I predict that the student loan deal will be a debacle, and people will wish that they could deal with a bank. In this case the middleman provided a service. The government can't even conduct a car sale last summer, or run a window caulking program without spending double or triple the estimate and taking much longer.

you'd think after 100% of government programs either fail or go bust people would start to put 2 and 2 together.

How about our department of energy. started under Carter in order to reduce dependence on foreign oil. at the time we imported 40% of our oil.
now 30 years later we import 70% of our oil and this department has a budget of 26 billion and employs 16,000. a smashing success! I can't wait until they've worked their magic on the healthcare industry.

You are so out of your mind its ALMOST comical. If there was ANY way the senate could have passed a public option, it would have been done. Obama REALLY wanted the public option, and only went away from it when he realized there could not possibly be any reform if they kept the public option.

This costly bill pasts last week and in Obama's speech the next day he says "this is the first step towards Universal Health Care"

And you say he governs from the center :rolleyes: I wish he governed from the center. Get real once and awhile.

“There will be a dire shortage of physicians if the PPACA becomes effective and is not overturned by the courts.”

One of the many sad things about this bill are that the bright young minds in this country will stay away from medicine and study something that will actually allow them to make good money. The quality of our care and our doctors is going to be right where the Dem leadership wants it to be.. the same "quality" of medical care that we are supposed to look up to from Canada & Europe. Crappy Care that Riot and Obama pretend is so great.

Sure you can. The problem with the programs that Obama proposes is that you only get the "good" news about them. This is simply morphing the student loan program from a govt backed program to a full fledged entitlemnt program. And regardless of what you may believe, entitlement programs always wind up costing WAY more than they are sold as.

The bill was touted as saving $61 billion over 10 years yet that doesnt take into consideration the new $77 billion in spending that it calls for. Net loss.

Then there is this...
"CBO explained that "savings" estimates are artificially high because of government accounting rules that undercount the risks of default when the government is originating the loans, while the new spending estimates are artificially low. Many colleges oppose the government plan specifically because the feds don't make the same effort to prevent defaults that the private lenders do."

and this...
"Both the House-passed bill and the President's budget increase Pell Grants and also create automatic future increases, so individual grants will grow faster than inflation every year. Colleges will pocket the money by raising tuition, so we have yet another federal program ensuring that higher education costs continue to rise even faster than health-care spending.

Mr. Obama's budget also calls for making Pell Grants a mandatory entitlement. At least now they are subject to annual appropriation and their growth can be slowed when tax revenues fall or other priorities rate higher."


And of course there is this...
"Various changes that the President proposes to the Pell Grant program would add another $0.2 trillion to the deficit between 2011 and 2020," CBO said Friday. That could turn out to be a very optimistic estimate if unemployment remains high and more people seize the educational opportunity to which they have just become entitled. Still another taxpayer trap will be sprung with the President's proposal to forgive some debt incurred by "overburdened" borrowers.

And how exactly is this going to be a money saver?
In addition, borrowers in the income-based repayment program who make payments for 20 years will be eligible to have the balance of their loan forgiven. Currently, graduates in the program are eligible for loan forgiveness after 25 years.

Plus the public service exemption after 10 years

are employed by any nonprofit, tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization;
are employed by the federal government, a state government, local government, or tribal government (this includes the military and public schools and colleges); or
serve in a full-time AmeriCorps or Peace Corps position

have their debt wiped away



So in effect we are "saving" money by taking federally backed loans away from the banks yet will wind up spending far more than saved since the Pell grant program has mandatory increases, we will be eating a whole lot more of the unpaid debt with the forgiveness program and the sure to be wasteful govt beaurcracy that adminsters this entire deal.

Was the old system a good one? Probably not. Is the new system going to be cheaper or more efficent? Not a chance.

Don't tell me I'm out of my mind, when it's clear as day you don't know what happened the last two weeks of healthcare reform regarding the discussion on public option, and what the President did to squash it in order to get the reconciliation bill passed.

And I predict it will be just fine. Since Clinton made changes years ago, it's been easy as pie to deal with the government regarding student loans - you can always get someone on the telephone, they are extremely responsive and quick, the website is interactive.

The banks did nothing except delay processing and confuse paperwork (my experience, thanks). The banks usually only had one person "trained" to do student loan paperwork, it was a nightmare. Thank goodness they are out of the picture.

I suggest to you and everyone else to read the bill , I am reading it and even though there is alot of government speak you can get to the meat of it , Im in the 200 pages . Interesting part is when they say there is going to be a committee to decide what end of life medicine you are alllowed to have . Awesome some dushe bag is going to say what you can and cannot have when you are dying . I know , I know insurance companies do it alreadyto an extent but at least it isnt my freaking government telling me.

There is nothing at all in the just-passed healthcare reform that has the government remotely involved in any way whatsoever in one's health care/quality of medicine.

Insurance companies dictate to a great extent the quality of medical care you receive. That is what turns off most of the doctors I talk to. The less that exists, the more doctors will enter the field.

What complete and utter nonsense. There is no end of life committee. That outright "death panel" lie was debunked last summer, for goodness sake.

There's going to be an Exodus from doctors' ranks, not an increase. Sheer govt BS is already squeezing them.

Sheer insurance company BS is what has been squeezing doctors since the late 1970's in my experience, and is one of the reasons I became a DVM rather than pursue an MD. Too many complaints from the doctors I knew talking about how difficult it was to deal with it all.

The less insurance company BS controlling how you practice medicine, influencing your insurance (malpractice type) costs, and expanding your office costs (paperwork), the more doctors we'll have.

Wasn't there something recently about the 238bil shortfall in medicare payments to Doctors in this new healthcare plan?

Lawyers are blameless in the squeezing dept. right?

Not that I've seen discussed - quote your reference? Only thing I've seen grossly is that it extends Medicare-delays shortfall for 9 more years.

?? Not in my opinion.

Why are you ignoring and not including saving the millions the banks take in fees? That is the direct equal funding for the increase in the Pell program.

The forgiveness programs are expected to be a wash (no essential change from current) from what I've read.

The "wasteful government beaurocracy that administers this entire deal" is already long in place, and has been doing a pretty impressively good job, from my 15 years of contact with them.

Now please be consistent, and go over to the other thread, and explain how Obama opening up drilling off the southeast US shore, and closing off Bristol Bay, is a leftist, progressive entitlement program that will end up costing us billions in unforseen charges and expense.

I'm sure the Govt. will be saving the tax $$ collected in the next 4 yrs. to put towards Obamacare, and not just spend it on whatever social program comes along. They are the picture of thriftyness!

http://www.democraticunderground.com...75175.......on short notice

thank goodness indeed.
so much for your efficiency and streamlining pipedream. the CBO says it will add $52 billion to the deficit. So triple that and you will be close to the reality.


(CNSNews.com) -- The student loan overhaul legislation signed into law by President Barack Obama on Tuesday could add $52 billion to the deficit between 2010 and 2020 when the cost of the market risks and administrative expenses of the loans are taken into consideration, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported.

On one hand you are saying that the govt will have nothing to do with the quality your healthcare


"There is nothing at all in the just-passed healthcare reform that has the government remotely involved in any way whatsoever in one's health care/quality of medicine.

Insurance companies dictate to a great extent the quality of medical care you receive."


But here you infer that there will be less insurance company involvement

"The less insurance company BS controlling how you practice medicine, influencing your insurance (malpractice type) costs, and expanding your office costs (paperwork), the more doctors we'll have"



So which one is it?

Its whatever one makes Obama look more brilliant at any given time. Duh.