"I will repeal Obamacare" Mitt Romney

[Greenbeard]

too stupid!! Republicans are proposing as much capitalism as they can in a nation where elections are decided by independents. But, 100% of the energy for interstate competition is Republican.

I think this is a little over your head and I'm not interested in continuing to feed quarters to the slogan machine, so let's call it a day.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The Democrats pushed health care reform for a reason, the cost .

100% incredibly stupid and liberal. China just switched to capitalism from liberalism and instantly everyone could afford everything


BO did the treasonous opposite perhaps because he had two communist parents?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

BO loves BO care while Romney has promised to repeal it. Would you call that the same????

Romney will promise pretty much anything. But the fact remains the he is the only leader who's successfully forced Robamneycare on citizens.

SUCKERS!!!!!

ah but if the people of MA are crazy liberal then lets watch and learn from their failure. Thats Federalism. BO is a scary brutal figure who wants a fascist corporatist national monopoly. Thats the ultimate treason in a free Republican country

 

[dblack]

BO loves BO care while Romney has promised to repeal it. Would you call that the same????

Romney will promise pretty much anything. But the fact remains the he is the only leader who's successfully forced Robamneycare on citizens.

SUCKERS!!!!!

ah but if the people of MA are crazy liberal lets watch and learn from their failure. Thats Federalism. BO is a scary brutal like figure who has wants a fascist corporatist national monopoly. Thats the ultimate treason

Damn.. so, I just can't get over the irony..... The corporatists serve you up Romney!!! A virtual clone of Obama. Srsly.... how gullible are you people???

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

too stupid!! Republicans are proposing as much capitalism as they can in a nation where elections are decided by independents. But, 100% of the energy for interstate competition is Republican.

I think this is a little over your head and I'm not interested in continuing to feed quarters to the slogan machine, so let's call it a day.

translation: I just got defeated by Republican libertarianism.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Damn.. so, I just can't get over the irony..... The corporatists serve you up Romney!!! A virtual clone of Obama.

a clone would not repeal BOcare on 100% libertarian grounds!!!!!

 

[dblack]

Damn.. so, I just can't get over the irony..... The corporatists serve you up Romney!!! A virtual clone of Obama.

a clone would not repeal BOcare on 100% libertarian grounds!!!!!

That's very funny.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Damn.. so, I just can't get over the irony..... The corporatists serve you up Romney!!! A virtual clone of Obama.

a clone would not repeal BOcare on 100% libertarian grounds!!!!!

That's very funny.

THe Heritage Foundation didn't think so. Sorry.

 

[dblack]

a clone would not repeal BOcare on 100% libertarian grounds!!!!!

That's very funny.

THe Heritage Foundation didn't think so. Sorry.

??? The Heritage Foundation? Those fools actually proposed the mandate. Man...you are bought and sold! You should get some kind of commission.

 

[starcraftzzz]

------
Under those proposals, health insurance plans being sold in a state don't compete on a level playing field and according to a uniform set of rules. They compete against each other according to as many as 51 different sets of rules, varying from plan to plan.----

too stupid!!! obviously for real competition in health care or toothpaste you need a national or international market place. This is something (free trade) that is Republican, not Democratic.

You do realize that Obamacare sets up an exchange were insurance companies compete and people choose which company they want to be with.
So I find it odd that you claim something that Republican want to repeal of which democrats enacted is a republican idea. Perhaps its your inability to think beyond one liners

 

[starcraftzzz]

1-----BO loves BO care while Romney has promised to repeal it. Would you call that the same????-----

Romney will promise pretty much anything. But the fact remains the he is the only leader who's successfully forced Robamneycare on citizens.

SUCKERS!!!!!-----

ah but if the people of MA are crazy liberal then lets watch and learn from their failure. Thats Federalism. BO is a scary brutal figure who wants a fascist corporatist national monopoly. Thats the ultimate treason in a free Republican country

Rommneycare has been very successful in MA, portending even more success in Obamacare because Obamacare actually addresses rising costs and wasteful spending

Premiums decline as a result of Rommneycare
REPORT: Massachusetts Premium Growth Declined After Passage Of Romneycare | ThinkProgress

Study: Romneycare is making Massachusetts healthier - The Washington Post
^RomneyCare in Mass, is making people healthier and has increased health outcomes, of which Obamacare has more health enhancing policies.

 

[Flopper]

Competition requires a level playing field between competitors.

of course all agree? Did someone disagree??? I wonder why you forgot to say whom??? Are you fooling yourself??

Yes, the Republican party and their surrogates disagree. Their proposals for greater "competition" rely on creating unlevel playing fields and subjecting different competitors to different sets of rules instead of the uniform rules that are obviously required.

I assume you are referring to the fact that health insurance companies are regulated by each state. It seems unlikely that Republicans in Congress would vote to override state laws and thus regulate health insurance at the federal level.

 

[Greenbeard]

I assume you are referring to the fact that health insurance companies are regulated by each state. It seems unlikely that Republicans in Congress would vote to override state laws and thus regulate health insurance at the federal level.

The legislation they've introduced over the past several Congressional sessions (including the current one) is based on instituting a bizarre system in which states no longer have control over what's sold in their markets and the federal government also refuses to set national standards. Insurers pick a "primary" state, whose insurance regulations they follow. They can then sell not only in the primary state, but also in any other "secondary" states they wish, subject only to the rules of the primary state. Meaning in any given state, you could have insurance plans from any number of insurers, each potentially subject to the regulations of a different primary state, "competing" with each other.

It's a bizarre, arguably nonsensical, system that has virtually no redeeming features. It's not a national marketplace, yet it strips states of the ability protect consumers living within their borders. It's not competitive in any meaningful sense, given that the primary competition between insurers is to find the right prime state/set of rules that allow it to segment the risk pool just right.

It's a nightmare in the making. Not to mention an awful mess.

 

[Flopper]

The Democrats pushed health care reform for a reason, the cost .

100% incredibly stupid and liberal. China just switched to capitalism from liberalism and instantly everyone could afford everything


BO did the treasonous opposite perhaps because he had two communist parents?

No, China switched from communism to a limited form of capitalism. There are major differences between liberalism and capitalism.

 

[dblack]

I assume you are referring to the fact that health insurance companies are regulated by each state. It seems unlikely that Republicans in Congress would vote to override state laws and thus regulate health insurance at the federal level.

The legislation they've introduced over the past several Congressional sessions (including the current one) is based on instituting a bizarre system in which states no longer have control over what's sold in their markets and the federal government also refuses to set national standards. Insurers pick a "primary" state, whose insurance regulations they follow. They can then sell not only in the primary state, but also in any other "secondary" states they wish, subject only to the rules of the primary state. Meaning in any given state, you could have insurance plans from any number of insurers, each potentially subject to the regulations of a different primary state, "competing" with each other.

It's a bizarre, arguably nonsensical, system that has virtually no redeeming features. It's not a national marketplace, yet it strips states of the ability protect consumers living within their borders. It's not competitive in any meaningful sense, given that the primary competition between insurers is to find the right prime state/set of rules that allow it to segment the risk pool just right.

It's a nightmare in the making. Not to mention an awful mess.

I'm not sure which legislation you're referring to (and if it came from Congress I'm sure as hell not going to defend it reflexively) but I find it interesting that your main issue with it is that it doesn't set "standards". In other words, it doesn't tell us what kinds of insurance we are and aren't allowed to buy.

In my view, that's a good thing. The consumer protection we need is oversight to ensure the insurance companies are telling the truth - that they cover what they say they will and aren't committing fraud. Other than that, we don't need to be told what kinds of insurance to buy.

 

[Greenbeard]

I'm not sure which legislation you're referring to (and if it came from Congress I'm sure as hell not going to defend it reflexively) but I find it interesting that your main issue with it is that it doesn't set "standards".

I think I've been exceedingly clear that my problem with it is that it uses 51 different sets of standards simultaneously in a given market.

 

[dblack]

I'm not sure which legislation you're referring to (and if it came from Congress I'm sure as hell not going to defend it reflexively) but I find it interesting that your main issue with it is that it doesn't set "standards".

I think I've been exceedingly clear that my problem with it is that it uses 51 different sets of standards simultaneously in a given market.

Then we agree. The commerce clause should be used to prevent the states from interfering in that away. Let customers decide what their 'standards' are.

 

[SniperFire]

It's a tax. I don't see how people fail to understand that. It's the exact same thing as levying a tax of $600 per person, then giving a $600 tax credit to people who have health insurance.

Read the fucking bill, which states that it is a penalty.

 

[dblack]

It's a tax. I don't see how people fail to understand that. It's the exact same thing as levying a tax of $600 per person, then giving a $600 tax credit to people who have health insurance.

Read the fucking bill, which states that it is a penalty.

It's a "penaltax"!

Whatever you call it, it's government coercing us into buying insurance from their corporate buddies. I call it bullshit.

 

[SniperFire]

BO loves BO care while Romney has promised to repeal it. Would you call that the same????

Romney will promise pretty much anything. But the fact remains the he is the only leader who's successfully forced Robamneycare on citizens.

SUCKERS!!!!!

ah but if the people of MA are crazy liberal then lets watch and learn from their failure. Thats Federalism. BO is a scary brutal figure who wants a fascist corporatist national monopoly. Thats the ultimate treason in a free Republican country

And the people in MA like their healthcare system by a 2:1 margin.

As you say, that is how Federalism is supposed to work.

Romney gets it.