Mandated healthcare.

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by LilOlLady, Apr 4, 2011.

  1. LilOlLady
    Offline

    LilOlLady Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    7,841
    Thanks Received:
    660
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Location:
    Reno, NV
    Ratings:
    +761
    MANDATED HEALTHCARE.

    What is mind boggling is why would anyone with a body have to be forced to buy healthcare coverage? Unless they are “freeloaders” who want someone else to pay for their medical care if they get sick or have and accident. I am forced to even if I don’t want to by having to pay higher hospital bills and higher healthcare premiums because hospital who have to treat freeloaders will recoup their losses by charging my healthcare insurance more and I will have to pay more for my premiums. For my own protection humans with bodies should be forced to buy their own healthcare coverage.

    Another thing that is mind boggling is why do people who don’t need healthcare don’t wants other to have healthcare? Like they eat three meals a day but don’t want other to eat three meals a day unless they eat in their restaurants.

    Government has numerous mandated laws that we have to follow or buy and if we don’t we pay a fine or go to jail. Government mandates that if you drive a car, you must pass a driver’s test and buy a driver’s license if you don’t you can be fined. Is you own a car and want to drive in you are mandated to buy a smog certificate, buy a registration and buy auto insurance. And in some states you are mandated to buy uninsured motorist insurance to cover your car if a driver hits your car and does not have auto insurance. Government can mandate you to buy auto insurance for your car but cannot mandate you buy healthcare for you? If this is unconstitutional they the constitution needs to be amended. ASAP. It can be done because it has been done 28 times. Constitution is not written in blood.

    I don’t want to pay for others auto accidents but if I am forced to buy insured motorist auto insurance that is what I am mandated to do. To protect me. If my car is hit by an uninsured motorist my auto premiums goes up.

    I don’t want to pay for free loaders medical care if they get sick or have an accident and don’t have healthcare and that is what I am mandated to do.

    Obamacare will drive up healthcare? Healthcare cost will to up anyway if everyone does not have healthcare.

    You don’t mind if an uninsured person gets sick or have an accident and use your medical insurance and you pay the cost of his medical care? And you are mandated to do it if you want to keep your healthcare coverage.

    If someone does not have a burial plan who pays for their burials?

    I want every driver to have auto insurance coverage and every body to have healthcare coverage because it protect me and cost me less.


    Mass has mandate healthcare and is subsidized by the federal goverenment.
     
  2. waltky
    Online

    waltky Wise ol' monkey Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    20,798
    Thanks Received:
    1,789
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Okolona, KY
    Ratings:
    +3,863
    Health care costs goin' up in spite of Obamacare...
    :eusa_eh:
    Healthcare costs rose while insurance coverage fell, studies show
    September 8, 2011 Reporting from Washington — The changes have left nearly half the working-age population without enough protection from illness. Altogether, 44% of American adults were either uninsured or underinsured last year, according to the Commonwealth Fund.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2011
  3. Bern80
    Offline

    Bern80 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,094
    Thanks Received:
    720
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Ratings:
    +726
    Good lord. I don't know one post could be so full of shit.

    Ummmmm because that's the only way ANYONE can be provided healthcare coverage without having to 'pay' for it.

    And you will be forced to purchase it again whether you want to or not under the insurance mandate.

    Show me one single person that has said they don't want someone else to recieve medical care. You won't find one. That is vastly different from who or if someone should have to PAY for medical care.

    STATE governments, not the fed, mandate auot insurance laws which they have right to do under the constitution.

    See above which renders the rest of the above drivel irrelevent.
     
  4. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    10,776
    Thanks Received:
    2,363
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +3,287
    I loved Romney's response last evening, the reason Mass. had mandated health insurance was because the free loaders were costing too much. If that doesn't become a great ad for so called Obama-care I do not know what would. We all pay now for the free loaders, so why not spread the cost around, seems simple.
     
  5. Bern80
    Offline

    Bern80 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,094
    Thanks Received:
    720
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Ratings:
    +726
    "Instead of actually addressing the free loading issue, we're just gonna make everyone buy our product." Yeah you run with that.
     
  6. C_Clayton_Jones
    Offline

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    41,543
    Thanks Received:
    8,933
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +23,869
    What’s interesting about these various conservative lawsuits and their attempt to derail the ACA is that they conflict with conservative legal dogma: that the courts are not an appropriate venue to address such issues.

    As Judge Sutton noted in his recent ruling on the ACA: just because a law is bad doesn’t mean it’s un-Constitutional. And the appropriate way to address a ‘bad law’ is through the legislative process, not the judicial.

    Of course, conservative opposition to the ACA has little – if anything – to do with the law and has mostly to do with politics. The right is primarily interested in humiliating Obama rather than ‘protecting the liberty’ of fellow Americans, subject to such an onerous and burdensome measure.
     
  7. Bern80
    Offline

    Bern80 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,094
    Thanks Received:
    720
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Ratings:
    +726
    Wrong. That's assuming you except the premise that it's constitutional in the first place. And that IS what is being challenged. Thus the courts ARE the appropriate place to challenge it. It is both bad law and unconstitutional law.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2011
  8. dblack
    Offline

    dblack Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2011
    Messages:
    20,119
    Thanks Received:
    2,006
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,766
    Likewise, just because a law was passed and nominally received majority approval, doesn't mean it's constitutional. And the appropriate way to address an unconstitutional law is through the courts.

    Of course if it's both bad, and unconstitutional, you have to wonder how we dug such a shithole in the first place.

    I suppose there's some truth to that. Still, if someone does the right thing for the wrong reasons, should we make a fuss and tell them to stop?
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2011
  9. Listening
    Offline

    Listening Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    14,989
    Thanks Received:
    1,642
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +2,045
    Practice.

    Lots of practice.

    :clap2: :clap2:
     
  10. Listening
    Offline

    Listening Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    14,989
    Thanks Received:
    1,642
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +2,045
    Why not dump the freeloaders ?

    Did you ever hear of Tenncare ?
     

Share This Page