Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3
What about the point that the guy who is currently paying 20%+ , trying to do the right thing, is still paying 20%+? This is the same guy that may have been paying 10% a few months ago.
This is happening in an environment where these banks and get capital for 1% or less, they get billions in bailouts, the pay billions in bonuses, and one company in particular made record profits.
.....
SChip is not new. How many more children are insured today than under Bush or what percentage? What about the net impact adjusting for increased regressive taxes to pay for the program.
|
This is exactly the point filtherton was making when he noted:
This is a recurring problem with Ace, because he frequently pretends to lack the ability to either a) see causal links where they exist and/or b) not create causal links where none exist. So he cites information to back up his position that actually has nothing to do, or is only tangentially related to, his position. Then, when someone tries to reconcile this mismatch with him, he either pretends to not understand, reiterates his original position as if it still made sense, or says something else that is only tangentially related to the topic at hand.
You consistently display an unwillingness or inability to acknowledge anything positive of any legislation or policy that does not conform with your pre-disposed ideology.
Instead you attempt to make the case in some convoluted manner that because such legislation or policies may not be perfect or go far enough (often because of Republican opposition), the good things they accomplish in helping the "little guys" are failures of Obama, the "bullshit artist."