Damn, Fred. Condescending much?
"Simplify" stuff for me? I "don't comprehend" or "don't have a clue?" Wow. Hubris. I have to tell you, that all sounds remarkably arrogant. (Can I ask what you do for a living, or why you feel that you are so competent to judge such things? Because maybe I'm talking out of the side of my face, here.) I feel that I have made cogent points. You can disagree with them, but dismissing them in the way that you are is arrogant. I'll call that one like I see it. I OTOH have expressed uncertainty on many of the issues, and have even pointed out ways that the ACA can fail, even if I find them to be unlikely. I generally find it to be a bad sign when someone has such CERTAINTY that they are right on such a complex issue, as you you seem to. That smells of dogma.
You accuse me of weighting factors preferentially, and ignoring others. Again, wow. Look in the mirror, Brother. At least I am capable of expressing anything other than certitude in my own infallibility. Frankly, yes, IMO you sound like you're scaremongering- regurgitating all of those Cruz talking points that have been so thoroughly debunked. So, check out FactCheck or Politifact. Sort of like my questions about how you feel about COBRA and letting poor people die in the street, you're furiously trying to avoid the subject. You just refuse to open your mind even a tiny bit on this. Just as a thought experiment why don't you pretend that you might be misinformed, and look up all of this ACA stuff on those sites, and actually read the whole articles. See what you think of them. (Some of them *gasp* are actually critical of Obama.) It is ALWAYS a good idea to read something from the other side of a debate with an open mind once in a while. If your opinions aren't changed then you can honestly say that you have considered the issue seriously. There is an old saying about religion: "I fear the man of only ONE book." I would expand that to a fear of a man of only one news source...
Heck, I try to be balanced and informed. I have read the stuff that Cruz et al have said about the ACA, for instance. I then researched it- including via those fact checking websites- and found most of it to be outright deceptions.
And I'll tell you a dirty secret- I used to be quite opposed to the ACA. You can probably find threads here on BPL where I made that stance. But that position was based on a poor understanding of what it was and what it intended to accomplish. Once I had the time to get above the propaganda (from both sides) I was at least willing to try it. If nothing else, it seems much more rational than COBRA. I also found that the right-wing propaganda on this issue was much more egregious lies than the left-wing stuff. (Sort of the opposite of the gun debate.) Now my biggest problem with the ACA is all of the crappy provisions that were included for political reasons.
So, I can be swayed on issues. (Another recent one involves L.L. Bean, oddly enough.) I'm willing to hear the other side. Can you say the same? And by that I don't mean arguing with people on an internet forum- that doesn't count. I mean actually researching an issue in a way that includes opinions dissenting from your own, rather than just listening to demagoguery.
I mean, if you come back in a few hours and say that you went through all those critiques on the fact-checking sites, and you still think that the ACA is absolutely, 100% destined to cause the downfall of America... ok. At least I would know you aren't just a FoxNews robot.
You have made some decent points. I can give credit where it is due. (OTOH, according to you absolutely everything I've said is nincompoopery.) The ACA has problems- I've said it many times. Taken as a whole, though, I'm not inclined to buy your argument that it will lead to economic ruin, the collapse of the US healthcare system, communism, white flight, global warming, herpes, inter-species marriage, or any other disastrous effect which you care to attribute to it.
EDIT--- I'm not sure where this came from:
"I have done my best to ignore some of your comments regarding how the free market didn't work and now the forced competition(oxymoronic no?) will, to avoid you more confusion."
One of the problems in the past was that there wasn't a free market. Heck, I'm all for markets- that's one of the things I like about the ACA- that it did away with the insurance monopolies that were in place in many regions. Do you think monopolies are a good thing? As a conservative, I surely don't.