Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 118

Thread: White House asks Supreme Court to rule on healthcare law

  1. #71
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,157

    Re: White House asks Supreme Court to rule on healthcare law

    No - we're talking about taking away the choice to pay for health care expenses out-of-pocket.
    You cannot deny that you support taking away that choice, and that choice has no effect on anyone else.
    How so.....if someone without insurance gets in a car wreck, needs intensive care and the bill is 40k and they make say 20k and can't afford it...who pays....

    THis is a both a non-sequitur and red herring rolled all into one line. Well done.
    My statement still stands.
    Because your idea of choice is self serving. You can still not purchase insurance, instead you would have to pay a penalty. You still have a choice. Please define what is appropriate for having a "choice". What limitations are there?

  2. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: White House asks Supreme Court to rule on healthcare law

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    How so....?
    What do you mean "how so"? It's the issue -I- brought up regarding -you- wanting to take away choices.
    If you have excercised your choice to pay for your medical expenses out of pocket and you don't have the money to pay for them, you don't receive the goods and services. Simple, really.

    Because your idea of choice is self serving. You can still not purchase insurance, instead you would have to pay a penalty.
    Why should I pay a penalty when I incur no cost and create no burden?

  3. #73
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,157

    Re: White House asks Supreme Court to rule on healthcare law

    Why should I pay a penalty when I incur no cost and create no burden?
    Since you pick and choose....what happens if someone is in a car wreck and needs intensive care that they cannot afford....who pays. Is there a burden to others?

  4. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: White House asks Supreme Court to rule on healthcare law

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    You didn't address anything. You just stated "It is because I said it is".
    No.. I explained my statement. You have not countered it, nor addressed anything else in my post.
    Why don't you go do that.

  5. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: White House asks Supreme Court to rule on healthcare law

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    Since you pick and choose....what happens if someone is in a car wreck and needs intensive care that they cannot afford....who pays. Is there a burden to others?
    You apparently didnt read the first part of my post, as evidenced by the fact that you asked your question.
    Allow me to repeat myself:

    What do you mean "how so"? It's the issue -I- brought up regarding -you- wanting to take away choices.
    If you have excercised your choice to pay for your medical expenses out of pocket and you don't have the money to pay for them, you don't receive the goods and services. Simple, really.

    Now then:
    Why should I pay a penalty when I incur no cost and create no burden?
    Last edited by PzKfW IVe; 10-04-11 at 01:58 PM.

  6. #76
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,157

    Re: White House asks Supreme Court to rule on healthcare law

    No.. I explained my statement. You have not countered it, nor addressed anything else in my post.
    Why don't you go do that.
    Your post

    Goods and services are goods and services; all are subject to market forces.
    I'll repeat, lack of substitutions...if you need a heart valve...there's no substitution. Choice, if you're needing healthcare now you don't have time to price around. Information, healthcare is specialized, most Americans cannot make truly informed decisions. Competition, most cities have minimal amounts of hospitals.

    Competition, subsitituion, informed consumers are the bedrocks of a good effective market system.

  7. #77
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,157

    Re: White House asks Supreme Court to rule on healthcare law

    If you have excercised your choice to pay for your medical expenses out of pocket and you don't have the money to pay for them, you don't receive the goods and services. Simple, really.
    Ok, so you're for changing the system we currently have then. You did not make that clear. You did not say that treating individuals without insurance should end.

    Now then:
    Why should I pay a penalty when I incur no cost and create no burden?
    Because as of now, people still receive medical care...I'm sorry, you didn't clarify that you weren't talking about reality just some libertarian paradise that does not exist.

  8. #78
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: White House asks Supreme Court to rule on healthcare law

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    I'll repeat, lack of substitutions.
    In the terms you;re trying to use, this is rrelevant to the issue.

    Market forces apply in all cases - regardless of the good/service, you look for the best cost and the best quality. In the case of the heart valve, you're subtituting someone who charges too much or does inferior work for soemone who doesn't. Eliminating insurance brings competition; competition, subsitituion, informed consumers are the bedrocks of a good effective market system.

    You may now address the remaineder of my post, specifically:

    Why do you think it's wrong that most American can afford out of pocket stuff they really NEED...?

    "We" have no responsibility whatsoever to make sure that anyone has anything.
    You, personally, may think you have a moral responsibility to do so, but you have an outlet for that, and you have no standing whatsoever to impose that morality on others.

  9. #79
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: White House asks Supreme Court to rule on healthcare law

    Quote Originally Posted by PzKfW IVe View Post
    In the terms you;re trying to use, this is rrelevant to the issue.

    Market forces apply in all cases - regardless of the good/service, you look for the best cost and the best quality. In the case of the heart valve, you're subtituting someone who charges too much or does inferior work for soemone who doesn't. Eliminating insurance brings competition; competition, subsitituion, informed consumers are the bedrocks of a good effective market system.

    You may now address the remaineder of my post, specifically:

    Why do you think it's wrong that most American can afford out of pocket stuff they really NEED...?

    "We" have no responsibility whatsoever to make sure that anyone has anything.
    You, personally, may think you have a moral responsibility to do so, but you have an outlet for that, and you have no standing whatsoever to impose that morality on others.
    Rightwing kooks thinks there's a "free market" in body parts!!

    Truth is, the free market is a fantasy that has never existed.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  10. #80
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: White House asks Supreme Court to rule on healthcare law

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    Ok, so you're for changing the system we currently have then. You did not make that clear. You did not say that treating individuals without insurance should end.
    No change is necessary. You are never compelled to receive goods and services you do not/can not pay for. Someone who chooses to only receive the goods and services he pays for refuses goods/services he cannot.

    Because as of now, people still receive medical care
    This doesnt address the question.
    Why should -I- pay a penalty when -I- incur no cost and -I- create no burden?
    How am -I- responsible for the costs/burdens created by -other- people?

Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •