• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama pulls plug on part of health overhaul law

Re: Administration Dismantles Significant Piece of Obamacare

Shucks. I thought only Paul Ryan and Republicans had Medicare and Medicaid in their crosshairs. Thanks for clearning that up.
 
Boo Radley said:
I used to sell medical suppleis. They were rather free to choose who they bought things from. We would give then things for free to keep their business, but the charged a **** load for thos ethings, to make up for what they would not get paid.

There is a lot that adds to the cost of health care, but being unisured only means we'll all pay for those who guess wrong.
Click to expand...

It depends on what items you sold. It's very weird, which items are regulated, and within those items, how much competition there is in any given market for it. Like needles, for instance. They're cheap. Little regulation, lots of competition. But other things, again, like bed pans, costly. I'm sure it makes since to someone, but my uncle, who is an ER doctor, can't make heads nor tails about it...why some things cost so much, and are so heavily regulated, and others aren't.
 
Reg said:
The uninsured get health care. You want government to micromanage everyone's health care. The two have nothing to do with each other.
Click to expand...

The uninsured get health care if they walk, crawl or are otherwise brought into an emergency room for treatment. I'd hardly call that health care; more like triage....stop the bleeding, patch the wound, repair the break, stablize the patient's vitals...monitor, release then bill for services.

You're done...see you next "non-emergency" emergency hits ya'...
 
Also important to the conversation is that health insurance is not health care.
 
Re: Administration Dismantles Significant Piece of Obamacare

Reg said:
Shucks. I thought only Paul Ryan and Republicans had Medicare and Medicaid in their crosshairs. Thanks for clearning that up.
Click to expand...

You're welcome.

But just so we're clear...both Medicaid and Medicare are still there. But honestly, I'm still having a hard time understanding why Republicans are so up in arms over this CLASS issue. I mean, the Sec HHS agrees with you; it's not a viable, cost effective program. And yet, if Medicaid and Medicare were slated for termination at some future date and replaced with something similar to CLASS where every working individual paid into the system, it would work as a 2-for-1 program taking the place of both Medicaid (payouts/medical billing) and Medicare (long-term health services). I mean, all working individuals are paying into Medicare now via payroll taxes. What's the difference here between paying $5/month for CLASS and around 2.5% of your income into Medicare/Social Security?
 
Last edited:
Re: Administration Dismantles Significant Piece of Obamacare

Objective Voice said:
You're welcome.

But just so we're clear...both Medicaid and Medicare are still there. But honestly, I'm still having a hard time understanding why Republicans are so up in arms over this CLASS issue. I mean, the Sec HHS agrees with you; it's not a viable, cost effective program. And yet, if Medicaid and Medicare were slated for termination at some future date and replaced with something similar to CLASS where every working individual paid into the system, it would work as a 2-for-1 program taking the place of both Medicaid (payouts/medical billing) and Medicare (long-term health services). I mean, all working individuals are paying into Medicare now via payroll taxes. What's the difference here between paying $5/month for CLASS and around 2.5% of your income into Medicare/Social Security?
Click to expand...

I think that the republican party is going to go against ANYTHING that is not their own idea. Sadly, I think some in the GOP would gladly watch this country swirl the drain, if it gave them a better chance of winning an office in the coming year.
 
Boo Radley said:
By law, they cannot refuse an emergency. This came about because of people dying when turned away.
Click to expand...

Is it a law? I thought they were bound by oath to care for those in need...honestly, I'd never want to take my business to someone who let someone else die because they could not afford to pay for services rendered...
 
Deuce said:
Health care reform was debated for like a year. I read the entire bill in one day. If you think it was passed "in a hurry," I just don't know what to tell you. The GOP had plenty of opportunity for input. They didn't offer solutions, they offered NO NO NO NO NO NO NO. If you think that the GOP's motivation for resistance had anything to do with the content of the bill, you're delusional. They said from (before) day 1 that their first priority was to make sure Obama didn't get reelected. In the middle of the worst recession in modern history, their first priority wasn't to govern, it was to win.
Click to expand...

Your logic is severely flawed. Whereas you may have had the time and ability to read the bill in 1 day, our government is "working' on several things at one time. Also, there is never just no reason for a 1 "side" to disagree with or block a bill that through your logic would be a saving grace to the world. You also forget that the majority of people disagree with you hence the GOP majority representing the people who voted for them and their stances on issues such as this. If is the strategy of the GOP to make choices that gurantee that the majority of the American public will be satisfied and will CHOOSE them to represent them after the next elections, then are they not doing their jobs properly?
 
Last edited:
Obama was expecting Republicans to just show up and agree, and give him political cover. If Obama can't get re-elected, it's not because he didn't get anything he wanted for two years.
 
Smokified said:
Your logic is severely flawed. Whereas you may have had the time and ability to read the bill in 1 day, our government is "working' on several things at one time. Also, there is never just no reason for a 1 "side" to disagree with or block a bill that through your logic would be a saving grace to the world. You also forget that the majority of people disagree with you hence the GOP majority representing the people who voted for them and their stances on issues such as this. If is the strategy of the GOP to make choices that gurantee that the majority of the American public will be satisfied and will CHOOSE them to represent them after the next elections, then are they not doing their jobs properly?
Click to expand...

Get real. The vast majority of Americans are for a tax hike on the richest Americans. Republican politicians will do anything to stop it. Most Americans are pro choice. Republican politicians will do anything to restrict access to abortion. A plurality of Americans support Obama's jobs plan. 100% of Republicans voted against it. A majority of Americans wanted the debt ceiling raised. Republicans took it to the brink of default. A large majority of Americans want the two parties to work together to bring unemployment down. Republicans refuse to negotiate and filibuster virtually every Democratic proposal. This is without question the most obstructionist minority in modern history -- if not the entire history of the country.
 
10 years of tax increases on some to pay for one year of bailouts for public employee unions is not a "jobs plan."
 
Reg said:
10 years of tax increases on some to pay for one year of bailouts for public employee unions is not a "jobs plan."
Click to expand...

Fortunately no one has proposed anything like that.
 
Re: Administration Dismantles Significant Piece of Obamacare

Objective Voice said:
While those on the Right are crying foul about the CLASS Act and going around claiming brownie points for what they consider to be a failed portion of the PPACA, I truly wonder if any of them knows what the CLASS Act was actually designed to do?

Section 8001 of the PPACA (pages 710-729) outline the CLASS Act (Community Living Assistance and Supports). In a nutshell, the CLASS Act was designed to offer low-cost health benefits to clients via a long-term trust similar to what Home Health services or Medicaid provides to disabled individuals today before they reach retirement age. Clients between the ages of 22-65 would pay a premium of $5/month for up to 20 years before being eligible for full benefits. No enrollee would be able to utilize benefits under the CLASS Act for the initial 2-years of enrollment.
Click to expand...

Your monthly premium is way off. The CBO estimated a monthly premium of $65/month, while other agencies estimated premiums as high as $145./month. The Obama administration was crazy if they thought a 25 year old was going to voluntarily pay even $65/month for retirement benefits that they might never see. The CLASS ACT died because of grossly underestimated enrollment.

IF the healthcare reform bill makes it through the SC, which I seriously doubt, it will then die a slow death for the same reason the CLASS Act did. Young people will gladly pay the tax/penalty required rather than the expensive health care premiums.
 
KevinKohler said:
Is it a law? I thought they were bound by oath to care for those in need...honestly, I'd never want to take my business to someone who let someone else die because they could not afford to pay for services rendered...
Click to expand...

It's law. Doctors have an oath, hospitals don't.
 
KevinKohler said:
Is it a law? I thought they were bound by oath to care for those in need...honestly, I'd never want to take my business to someone who let someone else die because they could not afford to pay for services rendered...
Click to expand...

To follow up:

It requires hospitals and ambulance services to provide care to anyone needing emergency healthcare treatment regardless of citizenship, legal status or ability to pay.

Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom