The Great ObamaCare Debate, Part 237: Back to Court
again, be addressed multiple times itt. It's cute to see someone who doesn't care if people actually get timely care come at me though.
![[Phill]'s Avatar](https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/customavatars/avatar10430_44.gif){kind=avatar}
02-10-2014
, 08:05 PM
02-10-2014
, 09:09 PM
02-11-2014
, 11:17 AM
The GOP hates working America wrt the ACA?
http://www.salon.com/2014/02/11/why_...sonal_failure/
http://www.salon.com/2014/02/11/why_...sonal_failure/
Quote:
To the conservatives who have portrayed the CBO's findings honestly, this is still unacceptable freeloading. Some of them have resorted to mocking the class of people who will avail themselves of that option - "Bored with your job? No worries-now you can quit, thanks to the generosity of other taxpayers." Others, like Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., have taken a subtler approach, lamenting that Obamacare means fewer people will be "getting the dignity of work, getting more opportunities, rising their income, joining the middle class."
Ryan's conflating two different effects here. But a hairbreadth separates his comments from outright condescension - particularly those who will be able to retire early or raise a child because of Obamacare's healthcare guarantee. People who would have left the workforce already had it not been for the perverse incentives the old system created.
He and other conservatives are making an implicit moral argument about these people's choices - that their decision to stop working is inferior to an alternative in which they must keep their jobs to maintain steady health coverage. Particularly if other taxpayers are on the hook in any way. Scratch at that ideology very lightly, though, and you'll reveal a more expansive worldview that places the highest moral esteem on the possession of wealth.
....
It's the same ideology that undergirds GOP opposition to extending emergency unemployment compensation. A view of working people - and really everyone but the truly wealthy - as beasts of burden who will become lazy if they aren't prodded. If they can't work, don't feed them. If the missing pieces separating them from the ability to survive with what they already have are a coverage guarantee and a premium tax credit, it should be denied to them. If they've outlived their use, put them out to pasture.
Ryan's conflating two different effects here. But a hairbreadth separates his comments from outright condescension - particularly those who will be able to retire early or raise a child because of Obamacare's healthcare guarantee. People who would have left the workforce already had it not been for the perverse incentives the old system created.
He and other conservatives are making an implicit moral argument about these people's choices - that their decision to stop working is inferior to an alternative in which they must keep their jobs to maintain steady health coverage. Particularly if other taxpayers are on the hook in any way. Scratch at that ideology very lightly, though, and you'll reveal a more expansive worldview that places the highest moral esteem on the possession of wealth.
....
It's the same ideology that undergirds GOP opposition to extending emergency unemployment compensation. A view of working people - and really everyone but the truly wealthy - as beasts of burden who will become lazy if they aren't prodded. If they can't work, don't feed them. If the missing pieces separating them from the ability to survive with what they already have are a coverage guarantee and a premium tax credit, it should be denied to them. If they've outlived their use, put them out to pasture.
Last edited by Huehuecoyotl; 02-11-2014 at 11:37 AM.
02-11-2014
, 02:32 PM
