Which Freedoms Lost?

The fine is a percentage of your income. Read the law. Interesting how you are so very interested in health coverage. What about healthy practices? Will you support food restrictions on high caloric foods, a ban on smoking or prohibition of alcohol?

So you make 100k? Thats what it would take essentially to be fined $2000 for not having insurance. If you make 100k, which I have my doubts about, you'd be able to afford insurance.

Why are you so insistent I gamble against becoming ill. If I were to subtract what I have paid in premiums vs What I have actually used for my wife and I. I am out over 30k, in the past four years.

Are the insurance companies your cronies?

Now that it is passed though, I am seriously thinking about gaming the system. I save huge money.

Interesting.......

Your wife ever have a child?
If so who paid the bills?

If you had a child and it was born with a genetic disease.....would you be happy that no insurer would cover you? Who would you expect to pay for your childs treatment?
 
So you make 100k? Thats what it would take essentially to be fined $2000 for not having insurance. If you make 100k, which I have my doubts about, you'd be able to afford insurance.

Why are you so insistent I gamble against becoming ill. If I were to subtract what I have paid in premiums vs What I have actually used for my wife and I. I am out over 30k, in the past four years.

Are the insurance companies your cronies?

Now that it is passed though, I am seriously thinking about gaming the system. I save huge money.

Interesting.......

Your wife ever have a child?
If so who paid the bills?

If you had a child and it was born with a genetic disease.....would you be happy that no insurer would cover you? Who would you expect to pay for your childs treatment?

He hasn't responded since I proved he couldn't so easily "game the system". I guess he doesn't know everything about how healthcare works in this country after all. Shocking.
 
Why are you so insistent I gamble against becoming ill. If I were to subtract what I have paid in premiums vs What I have actually used for my wife and I. I am out over 30k, in the past four years.

Are the insurance companies your cronies?

Now that it is passed though, I am seriously thinking about gaming the system. I save huge money.

Interesting.......

Your wife ever have a child?
If so who paid the bills?

If you had a child and it was born with a genetic disease.....would you be happy that no insurer would cover you? Who would you expect to pay for your childs treatment?

He hasn't responded since I proved he couldn't so easily "game the system". I guess he doesn't know everything about how healthcare works in this country after all. Shocking.

It amazes me that a married person would even consider doing without healthcare.
 
Interesting.......

Your wife ever have a child?
If so who paid the bills?

If you had a child and it was born with a genetic disease.....would you be happy that no insurer would cover you? Who would you expect to pay for your childs treatment?

He hasn't responded since I proved he couldn't so easily "game the system". I guess he doesn't know everything about how healthcare works in this country after all. Shocking.

It amazes me that a married person would even consider doing without healthcare.[/QUOTE]


An extremely immature and irresponsible thing to do.
 
I still should have the freedom and liberty to be a fool if I decide I want to.

You're just another one of those tea beggar leeches who wants to wait until he's sick to buy health care insurance. Take personal responsibility for your health care expenses, be a rugged individualist, practice the Protestant work ethic, get a haircut, go find a job and quit being a burden on society.
Or maybe he just wants to pay for his rudimentary medical services out of pocket, and only have a relatively inexpensive high deductible catastrophic policy for the big ticket expenses.

Of course, do-gooder nannies like you with your must-cover mandates will have none of that.

Do you read minds? If not you should think about it because you are spot on.
 
So far I've seen some general posts on business regulation and health care reform (and the loss of freedom to choose is counter-balanced by the freedom to not pay higher costs and rates because of someone who chose not to get health insurance - IMHO).

Up until this post I haven't read of any real loss of individual freedoms.

Actually this is untrue. By forcing me to purchase insurance or face financial fines I lose my liberty to decide if I want to purchase health care or not. They are actually forcing me to spend money I may think is better used on something else. If I am allowed to decide not to buy insurance without facing fines and penalties then I would agree with your comment in blue but since this isn't the case I can not.

My freedom and liberty to choose my level of health insurance and if I even want to pay for health insurance has been taken from me. How do you not call that a loss of freedom? I need more of an explaination as what you gave so far doesn't do a good job of convincing me that I indeed have not lost a freedom and liberty.


If the law I linked you in boston goes through you will have another real example of a loss of freedom.

The link I posted for you about the farmer showed that he lost the freedom to be charitable with the food he grows on his private property.

Plymco-

I didn't see the link posted in the reply. Maybe I'm blind or computer/web stupid - I don't know, but I would be interested in seeing the article. Mind repsoting it?

Here's my rationale about the subject highlighted in blue:

Currently, health insurance isn't required for US citizens, yet. So you don't have to have health insurance (until the law is enacted). Let's say you become sick or get hurt. You go to the hospital and are treated. Then you get the bill. Let's say that because of the illness or injury you miss a lot of work or even lose your job or ability to work a job. How does that bill get paid? Well, you can claim bankruptcy. But then taxpayers foot the bill. So, we all pay without the freedom to choose - but we pay for someone else and not our own health insurance coverage.

There are programs for indigent people. An old climbing buddy of mine fell while rock climbing and destroyed his foot leaving him midlly disabled at the age of 20. He was in school and worked as a process server. He was unable to pay for his surgery, applied for a state indigent medical procedure assistance program, and while his application (and many others) went through the bureaucratic process he was forced to wait 8 months before the hospital would treat him. 8 months of untreated, and debilitating foot injury pain and no way to support himself. Basically being bed-ridden. He is on a payment plan for something like 10 or 15 years, and still tax dollars went to his treatment. All of us here in Colorado paid for him (and others). We had no choice. I don't mind because I sympathize with those less fortunate and who have suffered some sort of misfortune.

Health insurance companies have put profit over people. If that is something that you don't agree with, then there really isn't much I can say to convince you. I have seen enough to convince me that insurance companies (and not just health insurance) do their utmost to pay as little on each claim and investigate as much as they can to get out or paying the claim i.e. dropping coverage because of "pre-existing conditions" and some of those pre-existing conditions cited as reason for dropping coverage are ludicrous IMO. New regulation has put that to a stop at least in children's care and will stop all of it in the future. Sometimes what these companies have done has resulted in a person's death. To me that is ABSOLUTELY unacceptable. And it's never happened to me or someone I know, but it COULD.

So, instead of having the freedom whether to have health insurance or not is given up for another freedom: the freedom to receive treatment if I need to (which doesn't matter since I'm a vet) and the freedom to live in a nation where people come before profit and where a healthier populace will lead to a more prosperous way of life for all. Kinda like laws against murder, rape, and theft that allow me to enjoy a relative freedom from fear of widespread anarchy and oppression by the powerful.

Granted, the new health care regulations suck, IMO. I think we should go the way of almost all other western democracies and have single payer health care (like I do with the VA - which by the way, is rated as the #1 health care system in the country and I wait less than those with private health care, have never experienced rationing, and have avoided bankruptcy). If the health care industry lobbyists, marxism-scare tactics of many of those on the side of big health insurance companies, and Republicans and milquetoast Democrats who deem single-payer health care as the death of capitalism hadn't fought the bill and whittled it down to its current form I think the new system would've been much better for our country and its peoples. I still think its a step in the right direction and continue to hope that one day all Americans will enjoy the same great standards of health care I do with my socialist-health care: the VA.
 
Last edited:
Do Democrats even know how universal health care works? It means long waiting lists at public hospitals for operations, some people die before they get treatment. If you get health insurance the whole point is to the avoid the public system so you can get private health care and avoid the bureaucratic mess in the public health-care system (not to mention relieve the pressure on it). :eusa_eh:

Wow......you paint a pretty bleak picture of universal health care. So you say we may actually have to wait for non-emergency care. Scary stuff

Why is it that the life expectancy in those countries in those countries is higher than ours? Why do the people in those countries shudder at the thought of dumping universal health care in favor of a plan like the US? Why is healthcare so popular in those countries?
Why do they spend significantly less of GDP on healthcare?

Why is it that nobody loses their homes or goes bankrupt because they can't pay medical bills?

Clearly one can draw incorrect conclusions if one is ideologically driven, i.e. a left winger who cowardly calls oneself a rightwinger...or if one doesn't know the facts:

1. "... a study by Professors Ohsfeldt and Schneider at the University of Iowa, which shows that, if you leave out people who are victims of homicide or who die in automobile accidents, Americans live longer than people in any other Western country."
Medical Care Facts and Fables by Thomas Sowell on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent

Only those with a socialized medicine ax to grind would include homicides and auto accidents as an indictment of American healthcare.

2. Wrong about American healthcare:

"Despite the poor showing on the WHO study, the low longevity ranking of the United States is not likely a result of a poorly functioning health care system, according to researchers with the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). On the contrary, the United States functions well compared to Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries in terms of death avoidance:
Mortality reductions from prostate and breast cancers have been exceptionally rapid in the United States relative to a set of peer countries.
These unusually rapid declines are attributable to wider screening and more aggressive treatment of these diseases.
Screening for other cancers also appears unusually extensive, and five-year survival rates from all of the major cancers are very favorable.
Survival rates following heart attack and stroke are also favorable (although one-year survival rates following stroke are only average), and the proportion of people with elevated blood pressure or cholesterol levels who are receiving medication is well above European standards."
For text:
http://www.nber.org/digest/dec09/w15213.html


3." When the liberals compare America’s health care costs those of Canada’s, something they don’t figure in is going to the bathroom 12 times a night for 3 years until you can finally be fit in with a government doctor to fix the problem.
In the Province of Quebec, patients suffering from serious incontinence - ie, they have to aller aux toilettes jusqu’� 12 fois par nuit (that’s 12 times a night) - have to wait three years for a half-hour operation. That’s 3 years times 365 nights times 12 trips to the bathroom.
The central point about socialized medicine is that restricting access is the only means of controlling costs."
http://www.kxmc.com/News/Nation/389366.asp

And what a coincidence the the socialist-in-chief appointed Berwick, who champions rationing medical aid to Americans, to front the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services:

4. "...his remarks attacking private-sector solutions to health care problems, in support of “rationing with our eyes open”, and expressing his affection for the United Kingdom’s notoriously slow and rationing-plagued National Health Service as “romantic.”
Donald Berwick Appointed Head of CMS - by Benjamin Domenech

One can easily find his vids endorsing rationing healthcare.



The model for Obamacare????

The Brits NHS.




"Thousands die each year waiting for hospital beds in U.K.'s government-run healthcare system, doctors' study finds

5,449 patients have died in the U.K. over the past three years because they had to wait so long for a bed in the government-run healthcare system's overcrowded hospitals, a study by leading NHS doctors has found.


Nearly two thousand patients per year "lost their lives since 2016 as a direct result of waiting anywhere between six hours and 11 hours" to be seen, despite being gravely ill or injured, according to research reviewed by the Guardian. The doctors concluded that the deaths were "entirely and solely caused by the length of wait."

Thousands die each year waiting for hospital beds in U.K.'s government-run healthcare system, doctors' study finds
 
Do Democrats even know how universal health care works? It means long waiting lists at public hospitals for operations, some people die before they get treatment. If you get health insurance the whole point is to the avoid the public system so you can get private health care and avoid the bureaucratic mess in the public health-care system (not to mention relieve the pressure on it). :eusa_eh:

Wow......you paint a pretty bleak picture of universal health care. So you say we may actually have to wait for non-emergency care. Scary stuff

Why is it that the life expectancy in those countries in those countries is higher than ours? Why do the people in those countries shudder at the thought of dumping universal health care in favor of a plan like the US? Why is healthcare so popular in those countries?
Why do they spend significantly less of GDP on healthcare?

Why is it that nobody loses their homes or goes bankrupt because they can't pay medical bills?

Clearly one can draw incorrect conclusions if one is ideologically driven, i.e. a left winger who cowardly calls oneself a rightwinger...or if one doesn't know the facts:

1. "... a study by Professors Ohsfeldt and Schneider at the University of Iowa, which shows that, if you leave out people who are victims of homicide or who die in automobile accidents, Americans live longer than people in any other Western country."
Medical Care Facts and Fables by Thomas Sowell on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent

Only those with a socialized medicine ax to grind would include homicides and auto accidents as an indictment of American healthcare.

2. Wrong about American healthcare:

"Despite the poor showing on the WHO study, the low longevity ranking of the United States is not likely a result of a poorly functioning health care system, according to researchers with the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). On the contrary, the United States functions well compared to Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries in terms of death avoidance:
Mortality reductions from prostate and breast cancers have been exceptionally rapid in the United States relative to a set of peer countries.
These unusually rapid declines are attributable to wider screening and more aggressive treatment of these diseases.
Screening for other cancers also appears unusually extensive, and five-year survival rates from all of the major cancers are very favorable.
Survival rates following heart attack and stroke are also favorable (although one-year survival rates following stroke are only average), and the proportion of people with elevated blood pressure or cholesterol levels who are receiving medication is well above European standards."
For text:
http://www.nber.org/digest/dec09/w15213.html


3." When the liberals compare America’s health care costs those of Canada’s, something they don’t figure in is going to the bathroom 12 times a night for 3 years until you can finally be fit in with a government doctor to fix the problem.
In the Province of Quebec, patients suffering from serious incontinence - ie, they have to aller aux toilettes jusqu’� 12 fois par nuit (that’s 12 times a night) - have to wait three years for a half-hour operation. That’s 3 years times 365 nights times 12 trips to the bathroom.
The central point about socialized medicine is that restricting access is the only means of controlling costs."
http://www.kxmc.com/News/Nation/389366.asp

And what a coincidence the the socialist-in-chief appointed Berwick, who champions rationing medical aid to Americans, to front the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services:

4. "...his remarks attacking private-sector solutions to health care problems, in support of “rationing with our eyes open”, and expressing his affection for the United Kingdom’s notoriously slow and rationing-plagued National Health Service as “romantic.”
Donald Berwick Appointed Head of CMS - by Benjamin Domenech

One can easily find his vids endorsing rationing healthcare.



The model for Obamacare????

The Brits NHS.




"Thousands die each year waiting for hospital beds in U.K.'s government-run healthcare system, doctors' study finds

5,449 patients have died in the U.K. over the past three years because they had to wait so long for a bed in the government-run healthcare system's overcrowded hospitals, a study by leading NHS doctors has found.


Nearly two thousand patients per year "lost their lives since 2016 as a direct result of waiting anywhere between six hours and 11 hours" to be seen, despite being gravely ill or injured, according to research reviewed by the Guardian. The doctors concluded that the deaths were "entirely and solely caused by the length of wait."

Thousands die each year waiting for hospital beds in U.K.'s government-run healthcare system, doctors' study finds
Britain’s NHS is nothing like Obamacare

We are not that lucky
 

Forum List

Back
Top