Obama-care lands at the supreme court, what your thoughts?

[The Rabbi]

You are patently wrong about that. I have worked in health care 22 years in both the clinical and the business side. Every dime that gets 'written off' by a health care facility or practice is absorbed by the other patients who have insurance and copays, and that isn't even counting the amount of medicaid and SSD that gets spread around to people who are uninsured and unisurable. A bill like this will require that everyone contribute and I see nothing wrong with that. I just don't see why everyone can't comprehend that.

.

You say I'm wrong and then go prove my point. Thanks.

And no, this bill does not require that everyone contribute. The opposite. Low income people will get vouchers from the gov't for health insurance. That is not contributing.

So you want low income people to die outside the hospital and be stacked like cord wood? LOL.

This bill does not replace medicaid. That will always be around. But there are people who end up on it, and who end up as write offs who would/could get insurance. But they can't. This bill is for people who do not have and cannot get insurance on their own. You know, the working poor. Or even the not so poor who are uninsurable. I several people here who are independent contractors of one type or another, but they can't get insurance for themselves. It would give them the ability to purchase insurance. And THEY really want it to go through!

I cannot deal with your level of ignorance. first, you need to admit that my first post was correct, the taxpayer does not always get stuck with the bill. Then you need to apologize for channeling Alan Grayson. Third, you need to go familiarize yourself with what the bill actually says.

Obamacare does nothing to reduce the costs of health care and health insurace, which is the real issue today. In fact, it sets things up that will increase those costs. It will put everyone in a third party payer situation. And in that situation there is no incentive to economize, thus higher costs.

 

[Jarhead]

Obamacare Has Arrived in the Supreme Court

Well all we can do now is pray these people will do the right thing for this country

what do you think about this movement to do away with elections?

Everyone whining about having to buy something. Apparently none of them have read the law, because if they did, they would know you don't HAVE to buy anything! The mandate says you must HAVE insurance not BUY insurance. Big difference. Huge difference! If you're covered by a union plan or an employer plan you don't have to do anything! You're fine. If you don't have coverage, you can petition your employer to provide it and if they do, you're fine! If they don't, they pay a fine and you can get coverage from the exchanges.

And since this effects prices nationwide .... 100% Constitutional.

Of course, we have activist judges on the Supreme Court right now, so if I had to guess, I would say 5-4 they strike this down and also take the time to strike down Social Security and Medicare in the same decision.

wow.
You truly do see employers as somethingt different...not humans? Not Americans?
You are pathetic.

 

[DontBeStupid]

Obamacare does nothing to reduce the costs of health care and health insurace, which is the real issue today.

Not true. There are caps and limits on how much the cost of insurance can be increased every year. Anything over 10% needs to be publicly explained. Also, with a rush of new customers paying in to the system, premiums should go down.

Now on the health care, I do believe you're right about that. I don't think Obamacare has anything impacting the costs of health care directly.

 

[DontBeStupid]

Obamacare Has Arrived in the Supreme Court

Well all we can do now is pray these people will do the right thing for this country

what do you think about this movement to do away with elections?

Everyone whining about having to buy something. Apparently none of them have read the law, because if they did, they would know you don't HAVE to buy anything! The mandate says you must HAVE insurance not BUY insurance. Big difference. Huge difference! If you're covered by a union plan or an employer plan you don't have to do anything! You're fine. If you don't have coverage, you can petition your employer to provide it and if they do, you're fine! If they don't, they pay a fine and you can get coverage from the exchanges.

And since this effects prices nationwide .... 100% Constitutional.

Of course, we have activist judges on the Supreme Court right now, so if I had to guess, I would say 5-4 they strike this down and also take the time to strike down Social Security and Medicare in the same decision.

wow.
You truly do see employers as somethingt different...not humans? Not Americans?
You are pathetic.

No, Jarhead, what's pathetic is that you think Exxon, the corporation, is more important than your fellow citizens.

 

[The Rabbi]

Obamacare does nothing to reduce the costs of health care and health insurace, which is the real issue today.

Not true. There are caps and limits on how much the cost of insurance can be increased every year. Anything over 10% needs to be publicly explained. Also, with a rush of new customers paying in to the system, premiums should go down.

Now on the health care, I do believe you're right about that. I don't think Obamacare has anything impacting the costs of health care directly.

You are pathetic in your stupidity. I couldn't even begin here.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

It shouldnt be at the Supreme Court. It shouldn't have been passed period.

Heaven forbid something happens to one of the Justices and Obama gets another appointment before this case is heard.

That's my fear as well.

 

[oreo]

Obamacare Has Arrived in the Supreme Court

Well all we can do now is pray these people will do the right thing for this country

what do you think about this movement to do away with elections?

Do away with elections? I don't think so as that would be against the U.S. Constitution--and would not be a representation of the American public--and as we know there will be no taxation "without" representation.

As far as Obamacare--in my opinion it walks all over the 10th amendment to the constitution. If we are forced by the Federal Government to purchase health insurance--then what stops them from requiring that each and every household in America has a treadmill in it too--

 

[francoHFW]

#61- You are misled: Under ACA, only 15% of insurer spending can go to other than care (now 27%)- new low cost clinics, guidelines against malpractice, exchanges, transparency, and MORE TO COME. Tons of things you'll never hear about from the Pub Propaganda machine, dittohead...

 

[DontBeStupid]

Obamacare does nothing to reduce the costs of health care and health insurace, which is the real issue today.

Not true. There are caps and limits on how much the cost of insurance can be increased every year. Anything over 10% needs to be publicly explained. Also, with a rush of new customers paying in to the system, premiums should go down.

Now on the health care, I do believe you're right about that. I don't think Obamacare has anything impacting the costs of health care directly.

You are pathetic in your stupidity. I couldn't even begin here.

I like how we agree on something and you negative rep me anyway.

You don't actually read my posts, do you? You just see me and hit negative every time, don't you?

 

[oreo]

Everyone whining about having to buy something. Apparently none of them have read the law, because if they did, they would know you don't HAVE to buy anything! The mandate says you must HAVE insurance not BUY insurance. Big difference. Huge difference! If you're covered by a union plan or an employer plan you don't have to do anything! You're fine. If you don't have coverage, you can petition your employer to provide it and if they do, you're fine! If they don't, they pay a fine and you can get coverage from the exchanges.

And since this effects prices nationwide .... 100% Constitutional.

Of course, we have activist judges on the Supreme Court right now, so if I had to guess, I would say 5-4 they strike this down and also take the time to strike down Social Security and Medicare in the same decision.

wow.
You truly do see employers as somethingt different...not humans? Not Americans?
You are pathetic.

No, Jarhead, what's pathetic is that you think Exxon, the corporation, is more important than your fellow citizens.

Not ALL businesse's in this country--work on two blocks in lower Manhattan--DUH. If you're going to bash EXON--then you may want to take a lot at General Electric who made 18.4 BILLION dollars last year and didn't pay a penny in federal taxes on it. Of course, Immelt the CEO of G.E. is also Obama's JOBS Czar--who recently partnered up with CHINA (creating jobs for them) to compete against American built Boeing.

Look it up yourself ditto-head--I am tired of trying to educate LIBERALS.

 

[DontBeStupid]

wow.
You truly do see employers as somethingt different...not humans? Not Americans?
You are pathetic.

No, Jarhead, what's pathetic is that you think Exxon, the corporation, is more important than your fellow citizens.

Not ALL businesse's in this country--work on two blocks in lower Manhattan--DUH. If you're going to bash EXON--then you may want to take a lot at General Electric who made 18.4 BILLION dollars last year and didn't pay a penny in federal taxes on it. Of course, Immelt the CEO of G.E. is also Obama's JOBS Czar--who recently partnered up with CHINA (creating jobs for them) to compete against American built Boeing.

How did I bash Exxon? Implying they are not more important than a person equals bashing them?

You have some fucked up priorities.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

If the government can make you purchase car insurance, pay into your social security retirement fund, medicare insurance, etc etc etc.., fining someone who does not purchase healthcare insurance is as legal as any of the aforementioned.

State mandates =/= federal mandates

Not to mention, nobody makes people buy car insurance. The laws usually states that if you register a car in your name, and operate it on the street, it must be insured.

A great many people do not have car insurance. It's an idiotic analogy.

 

[JRK]

Obamacare Has Arrived in the Supreme Court

Well all we can do now is pray these people will do the right thing for this country

what do you think about this movement to do away with elections?

Do away with elections? I don't think so as that would be against the U.S. Constitution--and would not be a representation of the American public--and as we know there will be no taxation "without" representation.

As far as Obamacare--in my opinion it walks all over the 10th amendment to the constitution. If we are forced by the Federal Government to purchase health insurance--then what stops them from requiring that each and every household in America has a treadmill in it too--

Too Much Of A Good Thing | The New Republic
dont understand where this is coming from, your thread is spot on

 

[Jarhead]

Everyone whining about having to buy something. Apparently none of them have read the law, because if they did, they would know you don't HAVE to buy anything! The mandate says you must HAVE insurance not BUY insurance. Big difference. Huge difference! If you're covered by a union plan or an employer plan you don't have to do anything! You're fine. If you don't have coverage, you can petition your employer to provide it and if they do, you're fine! If they don't, they pay a fine and you can get coverage from the exchanges.

And since this effects prices nationwide .... 100% Constitutional.

Of course, we have activist judges on the Supreme Court right now, so if I had to guess, I would say 5-4 they strike this down and also take the time to strike down Social Security and Medicare in the same decision.

wow.
You truly do see employers as somethingt different...not humans? Not Americans?
You are pathetic.

No, Jarhead, what's pathetic is that you think Exxon, the corporation, is more important than your fellow citizens.

Really?

Exxon? I could give a rats ass about Exxon.

But you? In an effort to make sure Exxon "pays its fair share" you are willing to have your fellow American go unemployed...

For you see....and something that I have told you many times.....I do not fight for the freedoms of Exxon....or Microsoft....

I fight for the freedoms of Ma and Pa.....I fight for the freedoms of the small business owner.

So while you are looking at how Exxon is going to have to suffer the ramifications of things like healthcare, I am looking at the small businesses that will have to...AND NOT BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO.

This is America. What is done for the goose is done for the gander. So while in all of your glee abgout Exxon having to pay more....you have lost sight of the small business owner that employs 20 people, but only profits 100K..

You see, I havent.

But jealousy and greed...two things you obviously display...have blinded you to the reality of things such as Obamacare.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

If I were a betting man, I'd bet that the Mandate portion of Obamacare is struck down.

A lot of the rest of it will fall under the regulatory power of the Federal Government. It's a bit dicey, as that regulatory power falls under Interstate Commerce and Healthcare is actually regulated by the State to the point you can't actually DO business cross state lines when it comes to health care, but I'm betting you'll see the Supreme Court uphold a lot of the finer details.

Some of it, like the Exchanges, won't even be addressed as those are well within Federal power.

Once the Mandate is struck down though, that's going to cut the heart out of this bill. The Mandate was the one pay off for the Health Insurance Providers that might have got them to bring down costs. Without it you'll see the Insurance Companies saddled with more regulation and less incentive to bring down cost.

 

[Claudette]

If the government can make you purchase car insurance, pay into your social security retirement fund, medicare insurance, etc etc etc.., fining someone who does not purchase healthcare insurance is as legal as any of the aforementioned.

State mandates =/= federal mandates

Not to mention, nobody makes people buy car insurance. The laws usually states that if you register a car in your name, and operate it on the street, it must be insured.

A great many people do not have car insurance. It's an idiotic analogy.

Of course it is.

But idiots keep using it.

 

[Jarhead]

If I were a betting man, I'd bet that the Mandate portion of Obamacare is struck down.

A lot of the rest of it will fall under the regulatory power of the Federal Government. It's a bit dicey, as that regulatory power falls under Interstate Commerce and Healthcare is actually regulated by the State to the point you can't actually DO business cross state lines when it comes to health care, but I'm betting you'll see the Supreme Court uphold a lot of the finer details.

Some of it, like the Exchanges, won't even be addressed as those are well within Federal power.

Once the Mandate is struck down though, that's going to cut the heart out of this bill. The Mandate was the one pay off for the Health Insurance Providers that might have got them to bring down costs. Without it you'll see the Insurance Companies saddled with more regulation and less incentive to bring down cost.

the madate is the offset to the pre existing condition thing.

You can not allow for someone to enrol in insurance with a pre existing condition without also madating the need for insurance.

Otherwise, people will not buy insurance until they are diagnosed with some catastrophic illness.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

If I were a betting man, I'd bet that the Mandate portion of Obamacare is struck down.

A lot of the rest of it will fall under the regulatory power of the Federal Government. It's a bit dicey, as that regulatory power falls under Interstate Commerce and Healthcare is actually regulated by the State to the point you can't actually DO business cross state lines when it comes to health care, but I'm betting you'll see the Supreme Court uphold a lot of the finer details.

Some of it, like the Exchanges, won't even be addressed as those are well within Federal power.

Once the Mandate is struck down though, that's going to cut the heart out of this bill. The Mandate was the one pay off for the Health Insurance Providers that might have got them to bring down costs. Without it you'll see the Insurance Companies saddled with more regulation and less incentive to bring down cost.

the madate is the offset to the pre existing condition thing.

You can not allow for someone to enrol in insurance with a pre existing condition without also madating the need for insurance.

Otherwise, people will not buy insurance until they are diagnosed with some catastrophic illness.

Agreed. What I'm saying is that I bet the Pre-Existing will be allowed to stand under a regulatory argument. And that will be the real disaster.

Should the Pre-Existing stay while the Mandate goes, then Obamacare will end up doing the very opposite of what it was supposed to do, and that will be a real problem.

 

[Jarhead]

State mandates =/= federal mandates

Not to mention, nobody makes people buy car insurance. The laws usually states that if you register a car in your name, and operate it on the street, it must be insured.

A great many people do not have car insurance. It's an idiotic analogy.

Of course it is.

But idiots keep using it.

yes...that is true and it frustrates the hell oput of me.

If you opt to own a car, you must carry insurance.

The key word being "opt".

Now...lets see someone apply that to the madate of health insurance.

Here...let me try...

If you OPT to live, you must have insurance......no...that doesnt work. Let me try again

If you live, you may opt to have insurance. No...Not it either. One more try

You can opt to live if you buy insurance. Nope, Still doesnt work.

Nope....the word "opt" does not come into play.

So yes, they are two totally different concepts.

 

[JRK]

If I were a betting man, I'd bet that the Mandate portion of Obamacare is struck down.

A lot of the rest of it will fall under the regulatory power of the Federal Government. It's a bit dicey, as that regulatory power falls under Interstate Commerce and Healthcare is actually regulated by the State to the point you can't actually DO business cross state lines when it comes to health care, but I'm betting you'll see the Supreme Court uphold a lot of the finer details.

Some of it, like the Exchanges, won't even be addressed as those are well within Federal power.

Once the Mandate is struck down though, that's going to cut the heart out of this bill. The Mandate was the one pay off for the Health Insurance Providers that might have got them to bring down costs. Without it you'll see the Insurance Companies saddled with more regulation and less incentive to bring down cost.

the madate is the offset to the pre existing condition thing.

You can not allow for someone to enrol in insurance with a pre existing condition without also madating the need for insurance.

Otherwise, people will not buy insurance until they are diagnosed with some catastrophic illness.

Agreed. What I'm saying is that I bet the Pre-Existing will be allowed to stand under a regulatory argument. And that will be the real disaster.

Should the Pre-Existing stay while the Mandate goes, then Obamacare will end up doing the very opposite of what it was supposed to do, and that will be a real problem.

What do we do with people who have a pre existing condition that does not have insurance?
it is a real issue that I am not sure how to resolve
Cobra has got so expensive when (if) you get an ROF