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

[Uncensored2008]

However, the most onorous parts of the bill aren't supposed to kick in until Obama is safely re-elected.

So you're saying that they'll never kick in?

Because IF Obama is reelected, he will BARELY be reelected - and I strongly doubt even that.

If we can instead elect a President committed to repealing Obamacare in its entirety and strengthen Congress with people who will support him/her in that, then we can start over and do some real healthcare reform. And that won't involve the federal government taking over control of 16% of the economy.

Amen.

 

[JRK]

The thing that bothers me most about this whole 'mandate' debate is that there are probably only a half-dozen or so of us here that would be railing against it regardless of which party passed it. Most of you partisan line toe tappers that are screaming the loudest would be defending it if the republicans did something similar. And likewise, all you Obama rump swabs that are defending it would be shitting all over yourselves if the republicans did it. You know who you are and you're all ******* douchewagons, the whole lot of you.

manifold what the Obama bunch is doing is down there lines and no one else s
Myths
Liberal myths

You want to fix the health-care system you do it one step at a time
You dont tell the CBO your going to pay for it by saving 500 billion in Medicare

 

[Big Black Dog]

Three words... Dead on arrival.

 

[JRK]

Three words... Dead on arrival.

I think so also
but what will replace it?

 

[Texanmike]

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.

You are not forced to buy car insurance. SSI is not constitutional and neither is Medicare nobody has the balls to fix the system though.

Mike

 

[Jarhead]

The thing that bothers me most about this whole 'mandate' debate is that there are probably only a half-dozen or so of us here that would be railing against it regardless of which party passed it. Most of you partisan line toe tappers that are screaming the loudest would be defending it if the republicans did something similar. And likewise, all you Obama rump swabs that are defending it would be shitting all over yourselves if the republicans did it. You know who you are and you're all ******* douchewagons, the whole lot of you.

true.

 

[Katzndogz]

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.

The government can't make you purchase car insurance. A state can make car insurance mandatory if you drive a car. If you don't have a car, you aren't required to have car insurance. If you don't work, you don't have to pay into social security or medicare.

 

[JakeStarkey]

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?

JRK has mixed his points. To the OP: the mandate may be invalidated, but the remainder of the bill will be upheld. A GOP Congress can refuse to fund it if Obama is re-elected and who will I suspect impound defense funding until he gets what he wants.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The government can't make you purchase car insurance. A state can make car insurance mandatory if you drive a car. If you don't have a car, you aren't required to have car insurance. If you don't work, you don't have to pay into social security or medicare.

Actually, they can't.

The states require proof of "financial responsibly" which provides for certain public liability and property damage claims. A bond is just as good as insurance. Most of us can't afford a $50,000 bond, so we buy insurance. But it isn't required.

 

[manifold]

The government can't make you purchase car insurance. A state can make car insurance mandatory if you drive a car. If you don't have a car, you aren't required to have car insurance. If you don't work, you don't have to pay into social security or medicare.

Actually, they can't.

The states require proof of "financial responsibly" which provides for certain public liability and property damage claims. A bond is just as good as insurance. Most of us can't afford a $50,000 bond, so we buy insurance. But it isn't required.

Depends on the state.

Mine requires insurance.

 

[JRK]

Its so much more about the redistribution of wealth
it is in its purist form socialism
the mandate of taking part in an a event that will cost you wealth, no matter how your tied into as it will double dip us who work thru taxing us for wealth that will be used to provide subsidies to those who do not to have insurance

 

[CrusaderFrank]

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?

JRK has mixed his points. To the OP: the mandate may be invalidated, but the remainder of the bill will be upheld. A GOP Congress can refuse to fund it if Obama is re-elected and who will I suspect impound defense funding until he gets what he wants.

It's an all or none bill; it one part goes the while thing goes and Obama can never get a new similar bill passed through an American Congress

 

[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?

JRK has mixed his points. To the OP: the mandate may be invalidated, but the remainder of the bill will be upheld. A GOP Congress can refuse to fund it if Obama is re-elected and who will I suspect impound defense funding until he gets what he wants.

It's an all or none bill; it one part goes the while thing goes and Obama can never get a new similar bill passed through an American Congress

I see Jake is still on the Character assassination
Jake you cannot do any better than that?
I said nothing about anything,
I offered a link
I ask a question
out of that you got I made those comments you accused me of making?
there you again mis representing the real event
I have you on ignore and cannot get away from your character assassination on this public forum
Why dude wont you stop?

 

[JRK]

Why is it the liberal has gone so far over board with this character assassination?

Instead of job creation from 2009-2011 this is what we got from the dems in congress and BHO and now its going to the supreme court, does anyone see that as a problem other that me?

Noe Libs that information
its accurate
That is all it is, okay?
chill out
I had nothing to do with it, voted against him
prayed for him

 

[emilynghiem]

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.

The government can't make you purchase car insurance. A state can make car insurance mandatory if you drive a car. If you don't have a car, you aren't required to have car insurance. If you don't work, you don't have to pay into social security or medicare.

Dear TCL and MC:
Some differences between the health care vs car insurance arguments
1. difference between states having jurisdiction to do this vs federal govt.
(as with marriage laws which technically cross over church-state distinctions,
the local states can issue marriage licenses under policies that represent those people, but the federal
govt cannot mandate the policies for all states if they don't all agree; the federal govt can strike down
laws that are deemed unconstitutional but cannot force the state to adopt something "optional"
which depends on the consent and representation of the people of that state. only if the people all agree on a policy such as marriage, they can get that implemented through the state as long as everyone agrees it is not imposing or excluding unfairly. the authority of law ultimately resides with the consent of the people.)
2. car insurance policies that allow drivers to WAIVE the requirement by showing
specified proof of ability to pay
3. car insurance is to cover the liability for damage that the driver may cause to OTHER people or their property

What I would do to address how to correct this whole health care policy:
1. change the option to "opt out" to the option to "opt in":
a. either give states/people the free choice to form their own exchanges
using either business or nonprofit or church-related networks or resources
b. or since the votes have been split over party lines, require that the Democrat Party members voting for this bill be required to fund and participate in the exchanges on a mandatory basis; while those voting against
it are NOT allowed to use those resources and must sign an agreement to cover health care other ways
(or through their own voluntary/charity exchanges under the current or some other system)
2. require insurance for govt wrongdoing or damages to the public, for criminal damages done to "other people" so that the costs of crime/corruption is insured to the taxpayers instead of charging the innocent parties for the damages of other people!

THAT would pay for the costs of law enforcement, prisons, health care, education,
if the people/corporations/govt agencies/officials who ABUSED or COST taxpayers
money were responsible for paying it either themselves or through insurance.

ANd if people are too high risk then no company would insure them, and
those people would have to correct how they operate; only those people with a record of
not being reckless, abuse, criminal, negligent, etc. would be able to live, work and govern in districts that had such a policy!

Precedent: I heard of at least one country that has insurance that covers things like drunk driving, so that the family affected by someone else's negligence has their income covered

 

[JRK]

Its really this simple
Do you support the re distribution of wealth, or do you support the country we had 5 years ago when it came to ones wealth

Before you attack GWB, in 2007 our UE rate was 4.7% and the deficit for the year with the great victory in Iraq having its most intense year was 163 billion

And to be honest we could have went more conservative then.

That is the real question. BHO cares nothing about health-care
its about taking money from me (I make 75k a year) and giving it to others in there 40s who are still in there bed asleep this morning by choice
its to punish those who are doing the right things this morning and rewarding those who are not

SS for those who paid into it is fine (It could be allot better)
Medicare for those who earned it or have a legitimate issue whether it be short term or permanent has its place

BHO and his agenda wants that place beyond where it has ever been and should ever go
Its about a single payer system

 

[JakeStarkey]

JRK has mixed his points. To the OP: the mandate may be invalidated, but the remainder of the bill will be upheld. A GOP Congress can refuse to fund it if Obama is re-elected and who will I suspect impound defense funding until he gets what he wants.

It's an all or none bill; it one part goes the while thing goes and Obama can never get a new similar bill passed through an American Congress

I see Jake is still on the Character assassination
Jake you cannot do any better than that?
I said nothing about anything,
I offered a link
I ask a question
out of that you got I made those comments you accused me of making?
there you again mis representing the real event
I have you on ignore and cannot get away from your character assassination on this public forum
Why dude wont you stop?

JRK, a hint for you: to tell you that you are wrong is not character assaassination. Your link means nothing. I told you what I think will happen. The mandate may be thrown out, but I am not sure of that. The remainder of the bill will be upheld. If that is the case, then Obama will have to deal with a GOP Congress. He will impound defense funds until he gets the funding he wants.

You are a whining progressive right-wing neo-con who cries. Get over it, son.

 

[JRK]

Survey Says Obama's Health Care Act Partially Increased Costs For Americans | Fox News
Now that also could go to the liberal myth thread

 

[JakeStarkey]

The National Health Insurance Reform Bill is causing insurance companies to get all they can now in profits. Makes sense. Once the whole provision of the bill is in effect by 2014, the prices are supposed to come down. I doubt it.