It looks bad for the Obamacare mandate

[boedicca]

who said anything about big govt vs anarchy.

i simply asked if you oppose the mandate, would you accept having to sign a waiver preventing yourself from receiving medical care if it is not prepaid? if you think medical care is a luxury and commodity, then it should be able to be denied to you if you cant pay for it.

You did, you nattering nabob of nonsense.

 

[signelect]

What both you and the author of the article fail to realize is that asking a question about something doesn't equal agreeing with the premise of the question.

the judge is not there to agree or disagree, he is there to rule on the law, something you libs seem too gloss over.

 

[Foxfyre]

Before Obamacare, before Medicare, before Medicaid, I worked the credit desk for a small town hospital for awhile. My job was to work out plans for people to pay their emergency room or hospital bill or the large deductible most people carried on their insurance at that time.

Nobody was turned away because they couldn't pay.

And nobody was made a 'charity' case devoid of dignity and personal pride.

Usually I would work out a contract for the poorest folks to pay $10/month or more if they could afford it. Some paid off their bills. Some didn't. But none expected anybody to give them hospitalization or anything else free.

The really large crushing bills the community kicked in to help. Voluntarily. Nobody made them. And in those days, most healthcare was affordable for just about everybody even if you did have to pay off the big bills.

From Day 1 that Medicare went into effect all that began to change. And by the time Medicaid was added, healthcare was already spiraling out of reach of many people.

Anything the federal government is going to be involved in is going to cost much more than if the service is provided by the private sector. The bureacracy will swallow up a huge chunk of every tax dollar taken in to pay for it. And also every dollar borrowed to pay for it.

The federal government should not be mandating that private citizens have to use or buy any product and should be out of the healthcare 100% other than for monitoring and regulation to keep the food and drug supply coming into the country and crossing state lines as safe as possible.

 

[Skynet]

who said anything about big govt vs anarchy.

i simply asked if you oppose the mandate, would you accept having to sign a waiver preventing yourself from receiving medical care if it is not prepaid? if you think medical care is a luxury and commodity, then it should be able to be denied to you if you cant pay for it.

You did, you nattering nabob of nonsense.

i no post did i use the words" big government" or "anarchy". nice attempt though to deflect

 

[Skynet]

Dipshit, the argument I made in your siggy isn't for people getting free healthcare. YOU are the one who wants people to get free healthcare.

I can't believe I had to tell you that.

no you moron, i think everyone should be required to pay into the system.

once again your lack of reading comprehension is lacking as usual

Yes but your siggy says I'm the one making the argument.

exactly, you dont think people should be required to pay for their health care. by that argument if im gonna get it for free why should i carry insurance?

 

[AllieBaba]

Your siggy says, and I quote:

""And **** you, you have no control over what I post. Killing people is the same, whether it's infants, or old people, or just people who refuse to sign up for commiecare." Alliebaba

brilliant argument for letting people get free health care "

Except, of course, that's not any sort of argument FOR PEOPLE TO GET FREE HEALTH CARE. If it were an argument for people to get free health care, we would be agreeing!

As Cecilie says..."you nattering nabob of nonsense".

 

[kiwiman127]

I'm all for ending the mandate BUT I'm all for health care reform that doesn't favor the health care industry and I have yet to see one.
Many economist have stated that this nation cannot afford the continuing rise with the costs of health care in this country, yet many our politicians are afraid ruffle the health care industry's feathers.

 

[007]

Commiecare is Bad News for America

Not as bad as dumb wannabe cowboys in assless chaps.

Boy... you just can't get those ASSLESS CHAPS out of your head can you? A cowboy in ASSLESS CHAPS... and you're fixated on it.

Yup, you're a ******* homo... now STFU moron.

 

[Skynet]

Your siggy says, and I quote:

""And **** you, you have no control over what I post. Killing people is the same, whether it's infants, or old people, or just people who refuse to sign up for commiecare." Alliebaba

brilliant argument for letting people get free health care "

Except, of course, that's not any sort of argument FOR PEOPLE TO GET FREE HEALTH CARE. If it were an argument for people to get free health care, we would be agreeing!

im done with you are you are now ignored, thanks for showing your stupidity to the world.

 

[AllieBaba]

Hey I'm not the one who doesn't understand what my own signature says.

 

[Foxfyre]

I'm all for ending the mandate BUT I'm all for health care reform that doesn't favor the health care industry and I have yet to see one.
Many economist have stated that this nation cannot afford the continuing rise with the costs of health care in this country, yet many our politicians are afraid ruffle the health care industry's feathers.

There is a lot the Federal government can do to reform healthcare. It can apply anti-trust laws to break up the convenient monopolies that control healthcare in a number of states. It can enact meaningful tort reform to put a cap on the neverending class action suits that are enriching lawyers and benefitting almost nobody else and cap certain malpractice awards. Perhaps even set up a national insurance pool for folks who have a hard time finding insurance anywhere else. Or offer a national catastrophic insurance policy for dificult to insure people so that the mega illnesses won't wipe somebody out.

Then turn all the rest to the states to work out according to the best interests of their people. A one-size-fits-all plan without respect to differences in socioeconomic and cultural differences in various parts of the country is not the way to go. And giving free government healthcare to people is only going to continue to escalate the costs.

 

[AllieBaba]

And for health care reform to be reflected in lower costs, changes have to be made to benefit the health care industry. Maybe not exclusively, but if we can't make things less expensive and easily managed for them, how would it be less expensive and simpler for us??

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I am not a moral relativist.

I think the fact the richest nation on earth does not provide healthcare for all its citizens immoral.

I do not accept the argument that in any society class, privilege, and wealth are the only determinants of good healthcare.

I think that access to good healthcare is a good and a foundation for any arguments on individual freedom.

How can any American, any person, argue that something that hurts children is just the way it is and the alternatives too costly.

How can a America without healthcare claim to be a religious, caring, just, freedom loving nation.

You are not only a moral relativist, you are a hypocrite and a liar.

I have a standing challenge that not one single person has ever come close to answering. Show me one person anywhere in the United States who has ever been denied health care. Even without insurance you can see a doctor or get a necessary operation. Your problem is not that you think everyone should have health care, your problem is that you think George should pay for it because you believe it is the right thing to do.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VILa0SE7CVo]YouTube - ‪Juraj musí pomôc[/ame]

Unless you are willing to beat the crap out of George yourself and take his money from him you should shut the **** up about getting the government to do it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

great one sided argument from a conservative....

Feel free to find the one sided argument from the government and post it. Or post your own one sided argument, or refute the points that were made in the one sided argument you apparently disagree with.

 

[Skynet]

I am not a moral relativist.

I think the fact the richest nation on earth does not provide healthcare for all its citizens immoral.

I do not accept the argument that in any society class, privilege, and wealth are the only determinants of good healthcare.

I think that access to good healthcare is a good and a foundation for any arguments on individual freedom.

How can any American, any person, argue that something that hurts children is just the way it is and the alternatives too costly.

How can a America without healthcare claim to be a religious, caring, just, freedom loving nation.

You are not only a moral relativist, you are a hypocrite and a liar.

I have a standing challenge that not one single person has ever come close to answering. Show me one person anywhere in the United States who has ever been denied health care. Even without insurance you can see a doctor or get a necessary operation. Your problem is not that you think everyone should have health care, your problem is that you think George should pay for it because you believe it is the right thing to do.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VILa0SE7CVo]YouTube - ‪Juraj musí pomôc[/ame]

Unless you are willing to beat the crap out of George yourself and take his money from him you should shut the **** up about getting the government to do it.

i have a friend who was diagnosed with a pre-existing condition due to an over active thyroid and because of this the following things happen.

she can not get health insurance on her own, no one will insure her because of her condition. she was eventually lucky enough to get on an employer plan, but many of her treatments and medications are not covered and she can not afford them as they cost thousands of dollars. so since she can not pay, so she goes without. good enough? (oh she in in Orange County, CA)

 

[Quantum Windbag]

and youre a right wing nut job.

and the response the fed came up with to the individual mandate was actually this:

"Chief Judge Joel Dubina, who was tapped by Republican President George H.W. Bush, struck early by asking the government's attorney "if we uphold the individual mandate in this case, are there any limits on Congressional power?" Circuit Judges Frank Hull and Stanley Marcus, who were tapped by Democratic President Bill Clinton, echoed his concerns later in the hearing.

Acting U.S. Solicitor Neal Katyal sought to ease their concerns by saying the legislative branch can only exercise its powers to regulate commerce if it will have a substantial effect on the economy and solve a national, not local, problem. Health care coverage, he said, is unique because of the billions of dollars shifted in the economy when Americans without coverage seek medical care.

US judges raise pointed questions about health law - Nation Wires - MiamiHerald.com

Katyal has also argued that the government can force a person to buy broccoli or a membership in a health club. That does not make health care all that unique, does it?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

That could have been fixed if they just passed one bill to deal with pre-existing conditions.

Unfortuantely Obama and the democrats dont truly care, if they did they would have passed something small, targeted, and constitutional.

I bet conservatives would have supported a bill that focused solely on this one, very important, issue.

 

[Skynet]

and youre a right wing nut job.

and the response the fed came up with to the individual mandate was actually this:

"Chief Judge Joel Dubina, who was tapped by Republican President George H.W. Bush, struck early by asking the government's attorney "if we uphold the individual mandate in this case, are there any limits on Congressional power?" Circuit Judges Frank Hull and Stanley Marcus, who were tapped by Democratic President Bill Clinton, echoed his concerns later in the hearing.

Acting U.S. Solicitor Neal Katyal sought to ease their concerns by saying the legislative branch can only exercise its powers to regulate commerce if it will have a substantial effect on the economy and solve a national, not local, problem. Health care coverage, he said, is unique because of the billions of dollars shifted in the economy when Americans without coverage seek medical care.

US judges raise pointed questions about health law - Nation Wires - MiamiHerald.com

Katyal has also argued that the government can force a person to buy broccoli or a membership in a health club. That does not make health care all that unique, does it?

agreed, thats a stupid argument, do you have a link to that?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

1st and foremost the cost to employer's and states.
2nd that a board will be making decisions about who will get what.
And the biggest is the cost in the future ,just like all of the social programs that have been around for over 25 or 30 years or more, it finally gets way to expensive.

there is no board that will be making medical decision, that is a fallacy. all medical decisions will be left to doctors and patients.

so other than that your more upset with the cost that anything actually in the bill such as...

covering children until age 26
no more pre existing condition exclusions
health care exchanges
making sure 80% of premium dollars goes towards patient care
not being able to raise rates on individuals, you have to raise the rates on the entire group


hmmmm interesting...

The White House disagrees with you, are they lying?

 

[Skynet]

1st and foremost the cost to employer's and states.
2nd that a board will be making decisions about who will get what.
And the biggest is the cost in the future ,just like all of the social programs that have been around for over 25 or 30 years or more, it finally gets way to expensive.

there is no board that will be making medical decision, that is a fallacy. all medical decisions will be left to doctors and patients.

so other than that your more upset with the cost that anything actually in the bill such as...

covering children until age 26
no more pre existing condition exclusions
health care exchanges
making sure 80% of premium dollars goes towards patient care
not being able to raise rates on individuals, you have to raise the rates on the entire group


hmmmm interesting...

The White House disagrees with you, are they lying?

proof? link? the new bill does not say the commissioner gets to decide who gets what treatment.