Be a Supporter!

Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday

  • 7,289 Views
  • 220 Replies
New Topic Respond to this Topic
BumFodder
BumFodder
  • Member since: Jan. 14, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 36
Melancholy
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 1st, 2012 @ 09:47 PM Reply

At 7/1/12 08:07 PM, Camarohusky wrote: In shot: It's not about wanting or not wanting decent healthcarre, it's about people not giving a shit about anyone else and being too shortsighted to see how that affects themselves.

If theyre that much of stupid, submissive sheeple then they deserve to have the bad healthcare they want so badly.

morefngdbs
morefngdbs
  • Member since: Mar. 7, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 49
Art Lover
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 2nd, 2012 @ 11:57 AM Reply

At 7/1/12 08:07 PM, Camarohusky wrote: In shot: It's not about wanting or not wanting decent healthcarre, it's about people not giving a shit about anyone else and being too shortsighted to see how that affects themselves.

;;;;

So in effect this new law where you have to have a health plan or face a tax bill from your Revenue people (ok , they are calling it a fine, I personally see anything to do with a Government agency making you pay money is a TAX)
Which means the insurance companies are going to be making an even bigger fortune off this than they were before & poor people will end up with useless or next to useless policies !

I for the life of me don't understand why you didn't go for a middle ground where it is similar to how Canada is , private health plans are here , I know I'm part of one.

THere is the public system & more & more there is the private system where you pay if you can afford it. But i suppose to fund that you'd have to get rid of a couple of war machines !
or cut back to 10,000 drones ! ! ! !
& that would be really bad, after all the taliban has been planning on Pacific Ocean domination for quite some time & if they've got anything bigger than a rubber boat, a couple of extra aircraft carrier groups, best get built right away !
& let us not forget all the hidden taliban militants building up their forces in suburbia USA as well as out in the wild's where they are constructing their secret bases...are you sure 20,000 drones will be enough to root them all out ?


Those who have only the religious opinions of others in their head & worship them. Have no room for their own thoughts & no room to contemplate anyone elses ideas either-More

aviewaskewed
aviewaskewed
  • Member since: Feb. 4, 2002
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 44
Blank Slate
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 2nd, 2012 @ 11:50 PM Reply

At 7/2/12 11:57 AM, morefngdbs wrote: I for the life of me don't understand why you didn't go for a middle ground where it is similar to how Canada is , private health plans are here , I know I'm part of one.

Obama pushed for a "public option" but the Republicans and other Conservative factions screamed "socialism" long and loud and this President put re-election ahead of the policy he publicly championed and caved and gave us the law we have now...so basically, he WANTED something like Canada, then caved into pressure and passed this instead...and still got called a socialist, lol.


You don't have to pass an IQ test to be in the senate. --Mark Pryor, Senator
The Endless Crew: Comics and general wackiness. Join us or die.
PM me about forum abuse.

BBS Signature
Memorize
Memorize
  • Member since: Jun. 12, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 21
Animator
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 3rd, 2012 @ 12:15 AM Reply

At 7/2/12 11:50 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:
At 7/2/12 11:57 AM, morefngdbs wrote: I for the life of me don't understand why you didn't go for a middle ground where it is similar to how Canada is , private health plans are here , I know I'm part of one.
Obama pushed for a "public option" but the Republicans and other Conservative factions screamed "socialism" long and loud and this President put re-election ahead of the policy he publicly championed and caved and gave us the law we have now...so basically, he WANTED something like Canada, then caved into pressure and passed this instead...and still got called a socialist, lol.

Yeah, because it sure is fair when you're not only having to pay for your own healthcare, but everyone else's as well.

First, we're going to have the public "Option" compete with private insurance....

But while Private Insurance will have to be funded VOLUNTARILY, we're going to force everyone to pay for the Public "Option" regardless of whether or not they use it.

And this, everyone, is what liberals call "Fair Competition."

BrianEtrius
BrianEtrius
  • Member since: Sep. 28, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 32
Blank Slate
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 3rd, 2012 @ 12:16 AM Reply

At 7/2/12 11:50 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: Obama pushed for a "public option" but the Republicans and other Conservative factions screamed "socialism" long and loud and this President put re-election ahead of the policy he publicly championed and caved and gave us the law we have now...so basically, he WANTED something like Canada, then caved into pressure and passed this instead...and still got called a socialist, lol.

....which on top of, was a plan originally proposed and passed in Massachusetts but none other then our good current Republican-nominee and former governor, Mitt Romney. Ironically, in what probably is the smartest political move for Romney (for once, he does the smart thing), Mitt is agreeing with the president and going against party lines, saying how the mandate is not a tax, an important point.

This makes a lot of sense for once for Mitt, because if he didn't clarify, it would mean.......MITT ROMNEY HAS IMPOSED A TAX BEFORE. That's not exactly the best message to be running for a Republican party. Furthermore, the best thing for Romney at this point is to hope this thing goes away soon. If not, it's going to drown out cries of the economy before the election is over.


New to Politics?/ Friend of the Devil/ I review writing! PM me
"Question everything generally thought to be obvious."-Dieter Rams

BBS Signature
Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 3rd, 2012 @ 10:19 AM Reply

At 7/3/12 12:16 AM, BrianEtrius wrote: Furthermore, the best thing for Romney at this point is to hope this thing goes away soon. If not, it's going to drown out cries of the economy before the election is over.

With as bad as his Bain Capital reputation is going, Romney may want the economic issue to be drowned out.

BrianEtrius
BrianEtrius
  • Member since: Sep. 28, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 32
Blank Slate
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 3rd, 2012 @ 11:34 AM Reply

At 7/3/12 10:19 AM, Camarohusky wrote:
At 7/3/12 12:16 AM, BrianEtrius wrote: Furthermore, the best thing for Romney at this point is to hope this thing goes away soon. If not, it's going to drown out cries of the economy before the election is over.
With as bad as his Bain Capital reputation is going, Romney may want the economic issue to be drowned out.

But besides the economy, what major message is Romney going to run on? That's the thing; Romney's whole spiel right now is that he's NOT Barack and that somehow he knows better way of fixing the economy which is the elephant in the room. So why not bring it up? It's one of the few of Romney's legit cards to play, and it's a big one. But then again, Romney might just put his foot in his mouth somehow when it does happen.


New to Politics?/ Friend of the Devil/ I review writing! PM me
"Question everything generally thought to be obvious."-Dieter Rams

BBS Signature
Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 3rd, 2012 @ 11:36 AM Reply

At 7/3/12 11:34 AM, BrianEtrius wrote: But besides the economy, what major message is Romney going to run on? That's the thing; Romney's whole spiel right now is that he's NOT Barack and that somehow he knows better way of fixing the economy which is the elephant in the room. So why not bring it up? It's one of the few of Romney's legit cards to play, and it's a big one. But then again, Romney might just put his foot in his mouth somehow when it does happen.

True, but unlike RomneyCare, it's pretty hard to couch outsourcing, mass layoffs, and the sending of capital overseas as good for the US. He can at least couch RomneyCare as a states' rights issue (crafted specifically for Taxachuffets).

BrianEtrius
BrianEtrius
  • Member since: Sep. 28, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 32
Blank Slate
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 3rd, 2012 @ 11:58 AM Reply

At 7/3/12 11:36 AM, Camarohusky wrote: True, but unlike RomneyCare, it's pretty hard to couch outsourcing, mass layoffs, and the sending of capital overseas as good for the US. He can at least couch RomneyCare as a states' rights issue (crafted specifically for Taxachuffets).

Well, we can both agree that this ruling adds insult to injury as the Romney Ship slowly tries bail out to no avail. Romney probably just wants the next news story to hop on to come asap, which, this being the summer, may not happen for a while.


New to Politics?/ Friend of the Devil/ I review writing! PM me
"Question everything generally thought to be obvious."-Dieter Rams

BBS Signature
adrshepard
adrshepard
  • Member since: Jun. 18, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 07
Blank Slate
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 3rd, 2012 @ 06:38 PM Reply

At 7/3/12 11:36 AM, Camarohusky wrote: True, but unlike RomneyCare, it's pretty hard to couch outsourcing, mass layoffs, and the sending of capital overseas as good for the US. He can at least couch RomneyCare as a states' rights issue (crafted specifically for Taxachuffets).

Christ, you actually buy into that nonsense?
http://factcheck.org/2012/06/obamas-outsourcer-overreach/

Never, ever believe what a political campaign says about a rival candidate, especially when it involves "evil big business" and the like.

As for RomneyCare, who cares? Are people who agree with Romney going to vote for Obama out of spite? They're still donating pretty well to the Romney campaign. No one expects a candidate who has to please everybody to be ideologically consistent over years and years these days.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 3rd, 2012 @ 07:53 PM Reply

At 7/3/12 06:38 PM, adrshepard wrote: Christ, you actually buy into that nonsense?

No. Still, you can't deny that Romney was a vulture.

Somaridude
Somaridude
  • Member since: Jul. 5, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 5th, 2012 @ 03:24 AM Reply

Well we know now that people are going to be broke even more than before in which case were f***ed

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 5th, 2012 @ 09:43 AM Reply

At 7/5/12 03:24 AM, Somaridude wrote: Well we know now that people are going to be broke even more than before in which case were f***ed

Do explain.

aviewaskewed
aviewaskewed
  • Member since: Feb. 4, 2002
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 44
Blank Slate
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 7th, 2012 @ 03:22 AM Reply

At 7/3/12 12:15 AM, Memorize wrote: Yeah, because it sure is fair when you're not only having to pay for your own healthcare, but everyone else's as well.

Every time somebody without insurance goes to the ER, we're paying for that as well. Any insurer or dr. will tell you that. This myth that somehow we DON'T already pay for the uninsured needs to go away.

First, we're going to have the public "Option" compete with private insurance....

Not exactly "compete" necessarily...though certainly it could have encouraged competition surely.

But while Private Insurance will have to be funded VOLUNTARILY, we're going to force everyone to pay for the Public "Option" regardless of whether or not they use it.

Vs. how everyone is already paying for people who don't have insurance who use medical care and then don't pay for it because of the astronomical costs, or their own shortcomings...we're paying either way in the end.

And this, everyone, is what liberals call "Fair Competition."

I don't remember any liberal ever calling it fair competition. But really everyone, it wouldn't be a Memorize post without an ad hominem against someone or a group really.


You don't have to pass an IQ test to be in the senate. --Mark Pryor, Senator
The Endless Crew: Comics and general wackiness. Join us or die.
PM me about forum abuse.

BBS Signature
aviewaskewed
aviewaskewed
  • Member since: Feb. 4, 2002
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 44
Blank Slate
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 7th, 2012 @ 03:26 AM Reply

At 7/3/12 06:38 PM, adrshepard wrote: No one expects a candidate who has to please everybody to be ideologically consistent over years and years these days.

I'd at least expect them not to shit on a policy they themselves passed earlier on in their political career...ignore that fact, and try to slam their opponent with it and (I believe) say they NEVER would have passed or supported such a thing.


You don't have to pass an IQ test to be in the senate. --Mark Pryor, Senator
The Endless Crew: Comics and general wackiness. Join us or die.
PM me about forum abuse.

BBS Signature
Memorize
Memorize
  • Member since: Jun. 12, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 21
Animator
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 7th, 2012 @ 06:07 PM Reply

At 7/7/12 03:22 AM, aviewaskewed wrote:
Every time somebody without insurance goes to the ER, we're paying for that as well. Any insurer or dr. will tell you that. This myth that somehow we DON'T already pay for the uninsured needs to go away.

Which only happens because the Government mandates it.

Once again: A problem created by a so-called Government "solution"

Not exactly "compete" necessarily...though certainly it could have encouraged competition surely.

Right, because also not having to pay your bills because the Government funds you is also certain fair.

Vs. how everyone is already paying for people who don't have insurance who use medical care and then don't pay for it because of the astronomical costs, or their own shortcomings...we're paying either way in the end.

Which is a problem created by the Government.

First administrators complain about doctors working in free clinics...
So the Government creates rules making it impossible to work out of state, thereby wiping out free clinics.

Because these free clinics have virtually disappeared, the poor need to go to an expensive hospital...
So the Government mandates that no one be turned away, thus shifting the cost to everyone else.

So now everyone else has to be burdened with the Cost...
The Government uses it as an excuse to mandate everyone become permanent customers to insurance corporations.

As has been accurately said before: The Government is an expert at breaking your leg, then giving you a crutch while saying "See? Without me you couldn't walk."

I don't remember any liberal ever calling it fair competition. But really everyone, it wouldn't be a Memorize post without an ad hominem against someone or a group really.

It's not my fault you people can't pick up a damn history book or read about WHY the fuck these things happen.

BumFodder
BumFodder
  • Member since: Jan. 14, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 36
Melancholy
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 7th, 2012 @ 08:19 PM Reply

lol I just read up about healthcare in America and its so stupid. People are paying loads more in insurance to insurers who weasel their way out of paying insurance. Hospitals overcharge the uninsured and are unpaid in over half of emergency treatments to the uninsured. Health insurance companies stopped some child insurance program in retaliation to vote or whatever it is on the reforms and are donating loads of money to the people who are against it. Most old people dont have insurance and the amount spent on healthcare is insane etc

My brain has literally exploded. I know people say Americans are stupid, but wow.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 7th, 2012 @ 08:47 PM Reply

At 7/7/12 08:19 PM, BumFodder wrote: My brain has literally exploded. I know people say Americans are stupid, but wow.

When you have the Boomers (AKA the "Me" Generation) at the helm, it's pretty easy to see why things like this are so off.

morefngdbs
morefngdbs
  • Member since: Mar. 7, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 49
Art Lover
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 8th, 2012 @ 08:21 AM Reply

At 7/3/12 12:15 AM, Memorize wrote:
At 7/2/12 11:50 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:
At 7/2/12 11:57 AM, morefngdbs wrote: I for the life of me don't understand why you didn't go for a middle ground where it is similar to how Canada is , private health plans are here , I know I'm part of one.
Yeah, because it sure is fair when you're not only having to pay for your own healthcare, but everyone else's as well.

;;;
You cannot state that & be serious , because IF YOU ARE PAYING FOR ME>>>>>>>>then logically if EVERYONE IS PAYING.......then, I AM PAYING FOR YOU !
Get it ?
THere is no one paying while others do not.

Oh you say, welfare people don't pay or the unemployed pay no taxes !

They do when the tax comes from taxes, goods & services. You buy a pair of sneakers theres a tax on them it goes to health care.
Doesn't matter if your earnings are from drug dealing & the Gov knows nothing about your earnings. You go buy some bling, you pay a 'goods tax' it goes to health care.
you go to a resturant, fast food, buy a flashy car ....you pay H.S.T on that baby.
GET IT NOW ????

Everyone pays ,anyone can get help.
Its very simple, everyone pay to help thise sick today, everyone pays when you're the one sick or injured tomorrow

Plus if you think about it instead of freaking the fuck out, its like putting money in your mnedical bank account, building up for when you are the injured or sick one & it makes sense especially to get workers healthy again & productive as quickly as possible.

The USof A is theonly supposedly civilized & 1st world nation that still bankrupts its citizens for medical care !

You are not paying for anyone else, you are paying for YOU !


Those who have only the religious opinions of others in their head & worship them. Have no room for their own thoughts & no room to contemplate anyone elses ideas either-More

aviewaskewed
aviewaskewed
  • Member since: Feb. 4, 2002
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 44
Blank Slate
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 8th, 2012 @ 04:24 PM Reply

At 7/7/12 06:07 PM, Memorize wrote: Which only happens because the Government mandates it.

What? No....we pay for somebody who doesn't have insurance under the same principal that occurs when prices go up because people steal from stores and what not. If someone goes to a dr. or the ER and doesn't pay when the bill comes due, those institutions raise prices on services to everyone else as a consequence. I don't see where there's a government mandate in that...could you explain where the government fits into that equation?

Right, because also not having to pay your bills because the Government funds you is also certain fair.

Huh? I don't think we're actually talking about the same thing whatsoever now...

Which is a problem created by the Government.

Again can you explain to me HOW the Government has in any way created this problem and what your solution would be?

First administrators complain about doctors working in free clinics...
So the Government creates rules making it impossible to work out of state, thereby wiping out free clinics.
Because these free clinics have virtually disappeared, the poor need to go to an expensive hospital...
So the Government mandates that no one be turned away, thus shifting the cost to everyone else.

So now everyone else has to be burdened with the Cost...
The Government uses it as an excuse to mandate everyone become permanent customers to insurance corporations.

As has been accurately said before: The Government is an expert at breaking your leg, then giving you a crutch while saying "See? Without me you couldn't walk."

Took us awhile...but we actually got to a reasonable explanation. Excellent.

It's not my fault you people can't pick up a damn history book or read about WHY the fuck these things happen.

But it is your fault for making a claim, and then not substantiating the claim. Something you tend to do a lot when you'd rather just end a post with something insulting against a person or group.


You don't have to pass an IQ test to be in the senate. --Mark Pryor, Senator
The Endless Crew: Comics and general wackiness. Join us or die.
PM me about forum abuse.

BBS Signature
Angry-Hatter
Angry-Hatter
  • Member since: Mar. 17, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 21
Artist
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 8th, 2012 @ 05:01 PM Reply

At 7/8/12 04:24 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: What? No....we pay for somebody who doesn't have insurance under the same principal that occurs when prices go up because people steal from stores and what not. If someone goes to a dr. or the ER and doesn't pay when the bill comes due, those institutions raise prices on services to everyone else as a consequence. I don't see where there's a government mandate in that...could you explain where the government fits into that equation?

Crazy as it may seem, I think he's referring to the fact that hospitals have to give emergency care regardless of the patient's ability to pay. In other words, if only hospitals were allowed to turn away sick and dying poor people and have them go to charitable free clinics, then everything would be just dandy.


Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

Memorize
Memorize
  • Member since: Jun. 12, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 21
Animator
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 8th, 2012 @ 05:24 PM Reply

At 7/8/12 08:21 AM, morefngdbs wrote:
THere is no one paying while others do not.

Except that no one has a choice, now do they?

Such democratic people you are.

Oh you say, welfare people don't pay or the unemployed pay no taxes !

I could care less.

When I look at the fact that almost half pay no income taxes, I consider that half way in the right direction of no one having to pay it.


They do when the tax comes from taxes, goods & services. You buy a pair of sneakers theres a tax on them it goes to health care.

Then can you give me an example of any instance in your life where you can't be taxed or fined?

I work and be productive: I'm taxed.
I buy something: I'm taxed.
I don't buy what politicians want me to buy (ie. become a permanent customer base for Insurance Corporations): I'm taxed.

Why should I have to pay for merely being alive?

Doesn't matter if your earnings are from drug dealing & the Gov knows nothing about your earnings. You go buy some bling, you pay a 'goods tax' it goes to health care.
GET IT NOW ????

That wasn't the issue I was getting at, but ok.

Everyone pays ,anyone can get help.

Only people who are too lazy to get up and help themselves say that.

I've not once met a self-proclaimed liberal working in a soup kitchen. Why? Because they're idea of "Help" is forcing someone else to do it.

Its very simple, everyone pay to help thise sick today, everyone pays when you're the one sick or injured tomorrow

With absolutely no choice in the matter whatsoever.


Plus if you think about it instead of freaking the fuck out, its like putting money in your mnedical bank account,

Oh, you mean like Social Security... where the Government puts it in the General Fund to spend on War, missiles, bombs, corporate welfare...

building up for when you are the injured or sick one & it makes sense especially to get workers healthy again & productive as quickly as possible.

Which has nothing to do with Government mandated medicine, but mostly with the healthy life style choices of a culture.


The USof A is theonly supposedly civilized & 1st world nation that still bankrupts its citizens for medical care !

60% of Healthcare spending in the United States is Government.
35% is Private.

Of that 60%, it only covers around 50 million people while providing mediocre coverage, while that 35% covers over 200 million where the majority of its 'clients' are satisfied with their Coverage.

Now if a Government that's responsible for 60% of our Healthcare in our country can only barely cover around 50 million, what do you think will happen when its control is increased?


You are not paying for anyone else, you are paying for YOU !

Only in a liberal's bullshit, fantasy logic can anyone construe someone taking money from you at gunpoint and giving it to someone else as "Paying for yourself."

At 7/8/12 04:24 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:
I don't see where there's a government mandate in that...could you explain where the government fits into that equation?

Hospitals are required to treat people immediately regardless of whether or not they can actually pay.

This problem was created when hospitals and administrators became upset that doctors were providing their services for free in their own state or outside their states to free medical clinics and got the Governments to, more or less, shut them down.

Huh? I don't think we're actually talking about the same thing whatsoever now...

One relies on Voluntarism, the other relies on force.

The Public Option can never actually be "defeated" because they don't need to make a profit like who they're "competing" against.

If they go bust like the Post Office, the Government just takes more in taxes, borrows, or prints money to make up the difference.

But it is your fault for making a claim, and then not substantiating the claim. Something you tend to do a lot when you'd rather just end a post with something insulting against a person or group.

What? I made the claim and substantiated it within the same post.

You just didn't read all the way down.

And I actually have a question for every single one of you:

If people will truly be dying in record numbers in the streets if you don't have this mandate or force hospitals to treat people... then point to me a time anywhere in United States History where mass numbers of people were dying of illnesses and being left in the streets, before we had Government involvement/mandated medicine.

Also keep in mind the healthcare technology of the past.

EKublai
EKublai
  • Member since: Dec. 13, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 18
Animator
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 8th, 2012 @ 05:54 PM Reply

Okay, I forgot to update this thread when it happened.

The Final Ruling was: The Mandate is Constitutional.

Discuss.


BBS Signature
Angry-Hatter
Angry-Hatter
  • Member since: Mar. 17, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 21
Artist
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 8th, 2012 @ 06:12 PM Reply

At 7/8/12 05:54 PM, EKublai wrote: Okay, I forgot to update this thread when it happened.

The Final Ruling was: The Mandate is Constitutional.

Discuss.

You're a bit late to the party, bub.


Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

aviewaskewed
aviewaskewed
  • Member since: Feb. 4, 2002
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 44
Blank Slate
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 9th, 2012 @ 12:15 AM Reply

At 7/8/12 05:24 PM, Memorize wrote: Hospitals are required to treat people immediately regardless of whether or not they can actually pay.

Understood, then the hospital jacks up rates and what not to make up for people who do not then in turn, pay. Now to me this causes us to only have a couple of options:

1. Allow dr.s and hospitals to refuse treatment and care based on finances.

2. Change the system so that those who cannot pay have an option that's workable.

I like the idea of free clinics, but the problem is any "free" or "non-profit" healthcare enterprise is not equal to the for profit kind. They won't be able to afford and access the better equipment for certain tests and treatments and procedures. So in the end, there will still be cases that would need a for profit hospital and we then go back to the same old problem...which brings us back to why the whole issue came up to begin with...the more people that are insured, the better we'll all be.

One relies on Voluntarism, the other relies on force.

But there is a false equivalency you're pushing in acting like even if free clinics come back and become more widespread it's going to be EXACTLY the same as a for profit hospital. This simply isn't the case.

The Public Option can never actually be "defeated" because they don't need to make a profit like who they're "competing" against.

The Public Option doesn't EXIST because Republicans and so called Blue Dog Dems defeated it and turned "Romneycare" into "Obamacare". So I don't see what a policy that was stricken from what actually got passed into law has anything to do with this conversation.

If they go bust like the Post Office, the Government just takes more in taxes, borrows, or prints money to make up the difference.

If who goes bust? What institution are we talking about going bust now?

What? I made the claim and substantiated it within the same post.

You just didn't read all the way down.

I think you don't understand what claim I'm speaking of. I'm speaking of the swipe you took at Liberals and how they treat the bill that got passed. That I have yet to see truly substantiated. You haven't shown me evidence of even one Liberal saying that the AHA is "fair competition"

If people will truly be dying in record numbers in the streets if you don't have this mandate or force hospitals to treat people...

I dunno about record numbers...but it's fair to say people WILL be dying without access to healthcare...is that something you feel should be acceptable in a civilized and developed nation? Especially one that constantly tries to say they're the best in the world?

then point to me a time anywhere in United States History where mass numbers of people were dying of illnesses and being left in the streets, before we had Government involvement/mandated medicine.

Personally, I think this is the wrong question. Because it seems to me there's an inherent question of "how many dead people from lack of treatment is an acceptable number of dead people?" wrapped up in it. So really you're bringing up multiple side questions and trying to make the issue seem simple yet exposing that it really isn't.


You don't have to pass an IQ test to be in the senate. --Mark Pryor, Senator
The Endless Crew: Comics and general wackiness. Join us or die.
PM me about forum abuse.

BBS Signature
Memorize
Memorize
  • Member since: Jun. 12, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 21
Animator
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 9th, 2012 @ 02:27 AM Reply

At 7/9/12 12:15 AM, aviewaskewed wrote:
I like the idea of free clinics, but the problem is any "free" or "non-profit" healthcare enterprise is not equal to the for profit kind. They won't be able to afford and access the better equipment for certain tests and treatments and procedures. So in the end, there will still be cases that would need a for profit hospital and we then go back to the same old problem...which brings us back to why the whole issue came up to begin with...the more people that are insured, the better we'll all be.

Think of it like computers.

Sure, the poor just a decade ago couldn't really afford a good, decent computer, but what now costs $2000 today will end up being sold at Walmart for $500 just 2 - 3 years from now.

Yes, people with more money will receive better care.

But I'd prefer medicine to advance at a faster pace so the poor will be able to receive it quickly rather than our current condition of medical technology being held back and costing an outrageous amount of money.

But there is a false equivalency you're pushing in acting like even if free clinics come back and become more widespread it's going to be EXACTLY the same as a for profit hospital. This simply isn't the case.

But Health Insurance would be cheaper and it wouldn't be costing the Federal Government more than its own Military Empire that has over 900 bases in around 150 countries.

You want to keep up our current system or get politicians more involved? Fine.

But don't go whining about how they spend the money or how much they spend on it. Pretty soon, I get to laugh at all the idiots who thought getting the Government involved would be a good idea, when the Government's finances go to shit and suddenly no one can afford it.

So I don't see what a policy that was stricken from what actually got passed into law has anything to do with this conversation.

I wasn't the one who brought up a Public Option.

If they go bust like the Post Office, the Government just takes more in taxes, borrows, or prints money to make up the difference.
If who goes bust? What institution are we talking about going bust now?

Say you have a public option funded by tax payers and the Government.

Just like the Post Office.

What will happen when the Public Option can't raise enough money to cover everyone? The same thing will happen as with the Post Office... just borrow or print the money to maintain its worthless existence.

I think you don't understand what claim I'm speaking of. I'm speaking of the swipe you took at Liberals and how they treat the bill that got passed. That I have yet to see truly substantiated. You haven't shown me evidence of even one Liberal saying that the AHA is "fair competition"

Do I really need to link to Youtube videos showing liberals talking about competition between the Public Option and Private Insurers would be a "Good thing?"

I dunno about record numbers...but it's fair to say people WILL be dying without access to healthcare...is that something you feel should be acceptable in a civilized and developed nation? Especially one that constantly tries to say they're the best in the world?

Here's your problem.

You're making claims about people being left dying of illnesses in the streets because they couldn't get access to care... yet you can't name me one instance of this happening in our country even in the 1800's.

You're the one who has to prove it will happen.

Personally, I think this is the wrong question. Because it seems to me there's an inherent question of "how many dead people from lack of treatment is an acceptable number of dead people?" wrapped up in it. So really you're bringing up multiple side questions and trying to make the issue seem simple yet exposing that it really isn't.

You're the one making the claim that many more people will end up dead.

Back it up.

Angry-Hatter
Angry-Hatter
  • Member since: Mar. 17, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 21
Artist
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 9th, 2012 @ 03:43 AM Reply

At 7/9/12 02:27 AM, Memorize wrote: Say you have a public option funded by tax payers and the Government.

Just like the Post Office.

What will happen when the Public Option can't raise enough money to cover everyone? The same thing will happen as with the Post Office... just borrow or print the money to maintain its worthless existence.

Yeah, this isn't how the Public Option would have worked. The government would basically have set up an insurance company that would offer various healthcare insurance plans that people could purchase. It would not have been funded by the government through the budget, but would run on the insurance payments from its customers, just like any other private insurance company. The only difference from private insurance would be that instead of taking out profits, all surplus money would be put back into the company to drive healthcare premiums down.


Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

Warforger
Warforger
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2009
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Blank Slate
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 9th, 2012 @ 05:04 PM Reply

So the Republicans have been raving about who it's unpopular apparently, but as it turns out when people were told the details of the healthcare bill it turns out that the majority of people supported it.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/is_healt h-care_reform_popular.html

Considering how much of the bill is idea's that were spouted out by Conservatives ever since Nixon I don't think it's the contents of the bill that's controversial or offensive to Republicans but rather the fact that it was brought up by Obama.


"If you don't mind smelling like peanut butter for two or three days, peanut butter is darn good shaving cream.
" - Barry Goldwater.

BBS Signature
Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 9th, 2012 @ 06:12 PM Reply

At 7/9/12 05:04 PM, Warforger wrote: I don't think it's the contents of the bill that's controversial or offensive to Republicans but rather the fact that it was brought up by Obama.

The sad fact of our time: Politicans shooting down good policy for the sole purpose of political gamesmanship...

Angry-Hatter
Angry-Hatter
  • Member since: Mar. 17, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 21
Artist
Response to Ruling on Obamacare comes Thursday Jul. 10th, 2012 @ 02:13 AM Reply

At 7/9/12 05:04 PM, Warforger wrote: Considering how much of the bill is idea's that were spouted out by Conservatives ever since Nixon I don't think it's the contents of the bill that's controversial or offensive to Republicans but rather the fact that it was brought up by Obama.

The irony is that the ONE part of the bill that makes it so unpopular with the people is the individual mandate, an idea first thought up by the conservative Heritage Foundation and later sponsored by Republicans as an alternative to Bill Clinton's healthcare plan in the 1990's.

The lesson to be learned (but which Obama will never learn)? NEVER agree with Republican proposals when they are so obviously crappy; they will turn on you and blame you for agreeing to it in the first place.


Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur