Page 12 of 16 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 157

Thread: Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Obama Health Care Law

  1. #111
    Sage
    KevinKohler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    CT
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,995
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Obama Health Care Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Radical changes don't happen often. They often require some major stife and conflict. Absent radical change brought about by very painful conflict, the next best thing is compromise that works towards a direction, towards problem solving.

    I'm not sure we can get much worse than we are today without reform. Without reform, insurance costs were and are rising. Without reform, business was and is dropping insurance. Without reform, access was and is less than in coutnries with UHC. And without reform, we have paid more and still do than nearly any other country, and for less access.

    The pain that is needed for radical reform will be hard to come by, especially when we have distractions like PS or the silly celebreity of the month shinning brightly in front of us. We distract easily.
    Change for the sake of change is another one of those actions that leads quickly to the fire, from the pan. If this were about health insurance reform, I'd be on board 100%. If this were about health care reform, I'd be on board, but maybe at about 60-70%. But this is about neither of those things...this is about forcing people into becoming customers for a product. If you think of people as cattle, being herded by farmers (politicians), into specific gates and trucks (health insurance companies), then you will have an idea of how I feel about what this bill currently represents. I just can't trust it.

    Why can't I purchase health insurance over state lines? Why is it more viable to force every single eating, breathing american to purchase health insurance, rather than to affect that one, simple change? I ask myself questions like this, and all I can come up with are some very negative conclusions.
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    Reports indicate that everyone knew he was hauling a bunch of guns up there. But, since you brought it up, there's something which should be illegal: guns that breakdown.

  2. #112
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Obama Health Care Law

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinKohler View Post
    Change for the sake of change is another one of those actions that leads quickly to the fire, from the pan. If this were about health insurance reform, I'd be on board 100%. If this were about health care reform, I'd be on board, but maybe at about 60-70%. But this is about neither of those things...this is about forcing people into becoming customers for a product. If you think of people as cattle, being herded by farmers (politicians), into specific gates and trucks (health insurance companies), then you will have an idea of how I feel about what this bill currently represents. I just can't trust it.

    Why can't I purchase health insurance over state lines? Why is it more viable to force every single eating, breathing american to purchase health insurance, rather than to affect that one, simple change? I ask myself questions like this, and all I can come up with are some very negative conclusions.
    It's a LOT more than change for change's sake. It's coverage for 30 million people who don't have it. It's the elimination of denial of coverage for preexisting conditions. It's the end of lifetime limits. It's more choice and better rates for self employed people. It's allowing young adults to keep their parents' coverage until they get on their feet. I understand that a lot of folks don't like the way we got here but I can't understand how anyone can argue that these aren't all good things. And not small things.

  3. #113
    Sage
    KevinKohler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    CT
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,995
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Obama Health Care Law

    It's coverage for 30 million people who don't have it
    . Why should I be FORCED to purchase health insurance to grant this?
    It's the elimination of denial of coverage for preexisting conditions.
    How does making purchasing health insurance mandatory in order to bring this about? Why can't we do this WITHOUT the mandate?
    It's the end of lifetime limits.
    Again, why the mandate? How does making more customers for health insurance companies bring this about?
    It's more choice and better rates for self employed people.
    Being able to purchase insurance over state lines would do a LOT more for this than forcing everyone to buy insurance.
    It's allowing young adults to keep their parents' coverage until they get on their feet.
    Again, allowing for more competition in the market accomplishes this...I don't understand why we need this insurance purchase mandate to achieve this.
    I understand that a lot of folks don't like the way we got here but I can't understand how anyone can argue that these aren't all good things. And not small things.
    What I don't understand is why we need to force people to purchase the product in order to bring about changes in said product.

    I don't HAVE to buy a toyota in order for toyota to issue a recall on faulty excelerators.
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    Reports indicate that everyone knew he was hauling a bunch of guns up there. But, since you brought it up, there's something which should be illegal: guns that breakdown.

  4. #114
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Obama Health Care Law

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinKohler View Post
    . Why should I be FORCED to purchase health insurance to grant this?
    How does making purchasing health insurance mandatory in order to bring this about? Why can't we do this WITHOUT the mandate? Again, why the mandate? How does making more customers for health insurance companies bring this about? Being able to purchase insurance over state lines would do a LOT more for this than forcing everyone to buy insurance. Again, allowing for more competition in the market accomplishes this...I don't understand why we need this insurance purchase mandate to achieve this.

    What I don't understand is why we need to force people to purchase the product in order to bring about changes in said product.

    I don't HAVE to buy a toyota in order for toyota to issue a recall on faulty excelerators.
    First, you aren't being forced to buy anything. You can choose to go without insurance if you think that's a smart thing to do ... and pay a penalty instead.

    Why should you have to?

    1. Because we live in a society where we band together to look after the less fortunate; and

    2. Because if you make the stupid choice not to purchase health insurance then the rest of us will have to pay for your stupidity when you get sick.

  5. #115
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Obama Health Care Law

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinKohler View Post
    Change for the sake of change is another one of those actions that leads quickly to the fire, from the pan. If this were about health insurance reform, I'd be on board 100%. If this were about health care reform, I'd be on board, but maybe at about 60-70%. But this is about neither of those things...this is about forcing people into becoming customers for a product. If you think of people as cattle, being herded by farmers (politicians), into specific gates and trucks (health insurance companies), then you will have an idea of how I feel about what this bill currently represents. I just can't trust it.

    Why can't I purchase health insurance over state lines? Why is it more viable to force every single eating, breathing american to purchase health insurance, rather than to affect that one, simple change? I ask myself questions like this, and all I can come up with are some very negative conclusions.
    I don't think taht is how I would define it. It is changed aimed at solving a specific problem. We have to pay for people without coverage who guess wrong or can't afford coverage. It's more expensive and less managable to pay for this care as we ahve been doing.

    As for buying over state lines, well, because some states have different laws and provisions that would require either the policy you buy from another state to meet, which would raise their costs, or for the state to agree to not impose those requlations, which isn't likely to happen. Much of what comes from the conservative side, be it this or tort reform, are things that really wouldn't be noticed if passed. So the answer to your question, is your one simple change would do nothing of consequence.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  6. #116
    Sage
    KevinKohler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    CT
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,995
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Obama Health Care Law

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    First, you aren't being forced to buy anything. You can choose to go without insurance if you think that's a smart thing to do ... and pay a penalty instead.

    Why should you have to?

    1. Because we live in a society where we band together to look after the less fortunate; and

    2. Because if you make the stupid choice not to purchase health insurance then the rest of us will have to pay for your stupidity when you get sick.
    And now address all of my other issues.

    Look, it just seems to me that this bill does very little, but takes a LOT to do it. I still don't buy it. All I see is an industry that is about to be filled with customers who are forced into BEING customers by the law. If health insurance costs me....1,200 a year....and the fee for not HAVING health insurance is close to the same....then that is enforcing it via law. You can call it a fee, a subsidy, whatever you want. Doesn't change what it is.
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    Reports indicate that everyone knew he was hauling a bunch of guns up there. But, since you brought it up, there's something which should be illegal: guns that breakdown.

  7. #117
    Sage
    KevinKohler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    CT
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,995
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Obama Health Care Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I don't think taht is how I would define it. It is changed aimed at solving a specific problem. We have to pay for people without coverage who guess wrong or can't afford coverage. It's more expensive and less managable to pay for this care as we ahve been doing.

    As for buying over state lines, well, because some states have different laws and provisions that would require either the policy you buy from another state to meet, which would raise their costs, or for the state to agree to not impose those requlations, which isn't likely to happen. Much of what comes from the conservative side, be it this or tort reform, are things that really wouldn't be noticed if passed. So the answer to your question, is your one simple change would do nothing of consequence.
    I have to politely disagree. There are a ton of things you can purchase over state lines, and laws don't impede doing so. I simply don't see how health insurance will be THAT different.

    And again, I don't see how it's going to cost anymore or any less, before or after this bill. The cost will remain fixed, it's just going to get spread around...IE, socialized. And half assed socialism rarely works. Either go all the way, or go home.
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    Reports indicate that everyone knew he was hauling a bunch of guns up there. But, since you brought it up, there's something which should be illegal: guns that breakdown.

  8. #118
    Guru

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In a Blue State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,733

    Re: Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Obama Health Care Law

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    It's a LOT more than change for change's sake. It's coverage for 30 million people who don't have it. It's the elimination of denial of coverage for preexisting conditions. It's the end of lifetime limits. It's more choice and better rates for self employed people. It's allowing young adults to keep their parents' coverage until they get on their feet. I understand that a lot of folks don't like the way we got here but I can't understand how anyone can argue that these aren't all good things. And not small things.
    It's the end of personal freedom. It is the beginning of socialism. It is the head of the government telling you that they can take better decisions about your care than you.
    We went from sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me to safe spaces.

  9. #119
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Obama Health Care Law

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinKohler View Post
    And now address all of my other issues.

    Look, it just seems to me that this bill does very little, but takes a LOT to do it. I still don't buy it. All I see is an industry that is about to be filled with customers who are forced into BEING customers by the law. If health insurance costs me....1,200 a year....and the fee for not HAVING health insurance is close to the same....then that is enforcing it via law. You can call it a fee, a subsidy, whatever you want. Doesn't change what it is.
    I don't know what universe you're living in, but the average cost of a family health insurance premium in America is over $13,000 a year. You can elect not to have health insurance and it will cost you about $650/yr. to defray the expense that you will actually impose on the rest of us who are responsible enough to provide for our own health care needs.

    The bottom line is that people who can afford health insurance but who refuse to buy it raise everyone else's health care costs. When adults act like children I have no problem treating them like children.

  10. #120
    Guru

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In a Blue State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,733

    Re: Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Obama Health Care Law

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    When adults act like children I have no problem treating them like children.
    When our government acts like a dictatorship, I have no problem treating/calling it a dictatorship.
    We went from sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me to safe spaces.

Page 12 of 16 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... 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
  •