Compulsory Health Insurance

[ThePickledPunk]

You have to prove the those consequences. You can't.

Of course not. But if a business casn save money by dumping employee health insurance with the public option safety net- they will.

And that is but one of the myriad of unintended consequences that will result when a 1900 page monstrosity is put into action.

 

[Oddball]

Those consequences are far from unintended.

 

[The T]

A lot of people seem to have especially strong opposition to requiring people to carry health insurance. Opposition based on principal I understand. It's just one more governmental encroachment on individual liberty. But from a practical standpoint, I don't really see why this is such a big deal (IMO the public option is a far worse idea).

What is the difference between a law that mandates you buy health insurance and a law that mandates you pay taxes to cover your own health insurance (and likely other's too)?

The very FACT that *YOU* have to ask such an inane question regarding individual RESPONSIBILITY speaks volumes of your thought processes.

 

[The T]

You have to prove the those consequences. You can't.

What's to PROVE that IF you don't sign onto a PLAN and get JAILTIME, -AND- a FINE?

The PROOF is there. It's INTENTIONAL for the sake of CONTROL by the Washington Elitists.

Are *YOU* 'Normally* this dense in real life?

 

[namvet]

Demonstrate where Obama's plan 'socializes' the hospitals, pharmacies, doctor's offices, clinics, laboratories, etc. What a moron you so often are, Rab.

Demonstrate where is don't

 

[The T]

Those consequences are far from unintended.

These people are fuck'n astounding in their thought processes aren't they?

 

[ThePickledPunk]

Those consequences are far from unintended.

Agreed. perhaps I should have said "hidden"

 

[The T]

Demonstrate where Obama's plan 'socializes' the hospitals, pharmacies, doctor's offices, clinics, laboratories, etc. What a moron you so often are, Rab.

Another MORON that hasn't even tried to read the PLAN that was passed by the House. Until you DO?

*SHUT UP* about it and stop yer lying you ignorant TWIT.

 

[JakeStarkey]

None of you have read the plan, obviously. No where does it "socialize" health care. It reforms health insurance. What is your problem then, if you guys can't prove your assertions.

You are simply mad as well as irrelevant.

 

[ThePickledPunk]

None of you have read the plan, obviously. No where does it "socialize" health care. It reforms health insurance. What is your problem then, if you guys can't prove your assertions.

You are simply mad as well as irrelevant.

Noone has read the bill, little boy. Which is a big phucking problem.

 

[JakeStarkey]

None of you have read the plan, obviously. No where does it "socialize" health care. It reforms health insurance. What is your problem then, if you guys can't prove your assertions.

You are simply mad as well as irrelevant.

Noone has read the bill, little boy. Which is a big phucking problem.

Hi, Punk! If that is true, which I don't believe, then it sounds like the Dems learned how to legislate as did the GOP majority in Tom DeLay's day.

So you are saying that you don't know what's in the bill, but somehow the "intended consquences" (look above) are obvious, and that is socialism?

 

[The T]

None of you have read the plan, obviously. No where does it "socialize" health care. It reforms health insurance. What is your problem then, if you guys can't prove your assertions.

You are simply mad as well as irrelevant.

No some of us HAVE read it. It is YOU that remains the ignorant son of a bitch that hasn't, and ignores the warning to the threat of your Liberty.

I'll be willing to bet that your a low-wage troll with NO Healthcare plan that thinks it's peachy-keen to ROB others at the point of a GUN (FED GOVERNEMNT) to get others to pay your way, aren't you?

 

[ThePickledPunk]

None of you have read the plan, obviously. No where does it "socialize" health care. It reforms health insurance. What is your problem then, if you guys can't prove your assertions.

You are simply mad as well as irrelevant.

Noone has read the bill, little boy. Which is a big phucking problem.

Hi, Punk! If that is true, which I don't believe, then it sounds like the Dems learned how to legislate as did the GOP majority in Tom DeLay's day.

So you are saying that you don't know what's in the bill, but somehow the "intended consquences" (look above) are obvious, and that is socialism?

Socialized medicine will be the natural by-product of a public option. Thats what happens when you introduce a "competitor" that does not have to concern itself with profits into an industry. And who do you think is well acquainted with a 1900 page bill filled with references to toher legislative acts being modified or repealed? You think Pisslosi has a clue what is in it? Even Clinton recognizes that this bill will have all sorts of unintended consequences.

 

[ThePickledPunk]

None of you have read the plan, obviously. No where does it "socialize" health care. It reforms health insurance. What is your problem then, if you guys can't prove your assertions.

You are simply mad as well as irrelevant.

No some of us HAVE read it. It is YOU that remains the ignorant son of a bitch that hasn't, and ignores the warning to the threat of your Liberty.

I'll be willing to bet that your a low-wage troll with NO Healthcare plan that thinks it's peachy-keen to ROB others at the point of a GUN (FED GOVERNEMNT) to get others to pay your way, aren't you?

T- I am on your side- but noone could possibly have read that legislative sham without committing suicide.

 

[The T]

None of you have read the plan, obviously. No where does it "socialize" health care. It reforms health insurance. What is your problem then, if you guys can't prove your assertions.

You are simply mad as well as irrelevant.

No some of us HAVE read it. It is YOU that remains the ignorant son of a bitch that hasn't, and ignores the warning to the threat of your Liberty.

I'll be willing to bet that your a low-wage troll with NO Healthcare plan that thinks it's peachy-keen to ROB others at the point of a GUN (FED GOVERNEMNT) to get others to pay your way, aren't you?

T- I am on your side- but noone could possibly have read that legislative sham without committing suicide.

*Some of US* know the pertinent parts, and it's a fuckin' nightmare. Makes FDR and LBJ look like saints.

We know that this is nothing more than Government CONTROL cloaked in *CARING* for dumbfucks that could care less about taking responsibility for themselves, Affording Illegals access, Affording those that didn't care to use a CONDOM paid ABORTION Rights, and most importantly? GROWTH of a Government that is MORE interested in their growth, and POWER over you and I than they are holding people responsible for their own care.

It's a power play at the force of sending YOU and I to JAIL if *WE* don't comply.

It's the kind of legislation that needs to be slapped DOWN, along with the bastards that wrote it, and VOTED for it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Let's see: medicare has socialized and eliminated the private health industry, and the U. S. Postal Service has eliminated the private parcel post industry, according to the standards set by T and Punk.

Hmmm . . . and one of you says that there is no bill to read and the other one has read it. Hmmm.

 

[ThePickledPunk]

Let's see: medicare has socialized and eliminated the private health industry, and the U. S. Postal Service has eliminated the private parcel post industry, according to the standards set by T and Punk.

Hmmm . . . and one of you says that there is no bill to read and the other one has read it. Hmmm.

Medicare is an exclusive club, and the PO itself is slowly dying.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your model is premised on the concept that government competition eliminates private industry.

You have not demonstrated that medicare and the postal service are exceptions that prove your rule.

In other words, you are just a bogeyman going "ooga booga, the government is going to yet ya."

 

[manifold]

Thanks to everyone for your contributions.

There have been some pretty solid points made on both sides.

OldandTired is absolutely correct about this being a new precedent. The way he's couched his position, you cannot shoot any holes in his logic.

What is unclear is the amount of risk that is associated with setting this new precedent.

Because as others have pointed out, in practical terms this isn't entirely unlike an income tax since it would only be levied on those earning an income.

Neither side is wrong on this particular point IMO, it just comes down to a subjective determination of the risk/reward trade-off. As it stands, I'm completely unclear on the potential rewards so I'm disinclined to support assuming the risk. However, this issue still doesn't concern me nearly as much as the public option. This is simply a law. One that can be reversed. The public option is a bell that realistically cannot be unrung.

 

[Chris]

Noone has read the bill, little boy. Which is a big phucking problem.

Hi, Punk! If that is true, which I don't believe, then it sounds like the Dems learned how to legislate as did the GOP majority in Tom DeLay's day.

So you are saying that you don't know what's in the bill, but somehow the "intended consquences" (look above) are obvious, and that is socialism?

Socialized medicine will be the natural by-product of a public option. Thats what happens when you introduce a "competitor" that does not have to concern itself with profits into an industry. And who do you think is well acquainted with a 1900 page bill filled with references to toher legislative acts being modified or repealed? You think Pisslosi has a clue what is in it? Even Clinton recognizes that this bill will have all sorts of unintended consequences.

Such ignorance is amazing to me.

National health insurance is not "socialized medicine."

Only a few countries in the world have socialized medicine(England, Cuba), and it doesn't work as well as national health insurance.