Page 64 of 122 FirstFirst ... 1454626364656674114 ... LastLast
Results 631 to 640 of 1219

Thread: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

  1. #631
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I'm not concerned with what you believe. You've set up a premise where anything that disagrees with you must be wrong. That you can't see the error in this thinking is problematic. Honest, knowledgeable people disagree. Law, language is all too often less clear than we like. That is why people often disagree on what the law says.
    Your silly alinsky tatics are both transparent and boring.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  2. #632
    Battle Ready
    Grim17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Southwestern U.S.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    24,138
    Blog Entries
    20

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    And why doesn't that also work for doctors and hospitals? Why can't they demand some form of assurance they will get their money?
    Nobody is forced to buy flood or automobile insurance, and nobody should be forced to by health care insurance either.

  3. #633
    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 health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    I didn't say want. I said need. And given that everyone gets sick and/or injured and dies, this need is potentially limitless.
    Fair enough.


    As above, "minimal" is still potentially limitless.

    It's also the case that we already spend three times average of industrialized countries on outpatient care, and TWICE what the #2 country (Sweden) spends, so opening the floodgates of access to outpatient is definitely NOT going to make our overall expenditures go down.
    As they spend less, as to countries with UHC, how could we be opening up the flood gates by moving that way? I'm not sure I see how. Frankly we have a mind set in this country that all care (not need) is needed, that it is a product, a widget, something to make profit on and not a need being met. This is a larger issue, but eventually cost has to be dealt with by addressing our perception of healthcare.


    Course not, but that's the result when you can't bring yourself to tell anybody "sorry." WE CAN'T LET THEM DIE IN THE STREETS!!! leads to being obligated to never neglect anyone. We feel fundamentally entitled to whatever health care we need, and until that changes we're stuck with this runaway cost problem and steuggling to stick the bill on someone else.
    We've already decided we won't let people die due to not getting emergent care. Because of that, we need to have a clear plan on how to handle that. What's wrong here is that we want it both ways, we want the care without paying for it.

    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.

  4. #634
    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 health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17 View Post
    Nobody is forced to buy flood or automobile insurance, and nobody should be forced to by health care insurance either.
    If i want to drive I am. Can anyone opt out of health care? How?

    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.

  5. #635
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:12 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,589

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Alright, this multiquote **** getting really annoying. To sum up, I said what I meant and if you think otherwise, more power to you. You think anyone is under the impression that I'm shy about stating my opinion?
    As a matter of fact, I don't think you are, which is why I don't think you meant it as a "joke" until it got you into trouble.

    If you're getting frustrated, then you should probably consider what you post more carefully.


    "You didn't claim 'same effect' as. You said it meant as."

    What does that jabber mean?
    Your equivocation, and your moving goalposts. You earlier said they intended it to be tax. You were even "sure" the record of legislative intent would show it. Now you're simply saying it has the "same effect" as a tax.


    Re: your circular logic, this is one of those sad moments where, if someone is too dumb to see the pure dumbness of what he wrote, he's probably also too dumb to understand the explanation.
    This still does not refute me in any way, shape, or form.


    And no, you have not distinguished the cases. You made the "no **** Sherlock" observation that the facts were different and that's about it.
    Good grief -- "the facts are totally different, but that doesn't distinguish the case." Anyone with a fourth-grade education can identify how silly that is.

    I also said two other categories of things were different about it -- the nature of the laws at issue and the situations they meant to address. Gosh, how could that possibly affect the analysis of things like rational basis? Howsoever, indeed?

    If those things do not distinguish a case, then no cases can ever be distinguished.


    And re: the mandate, you are right -- it is no more a mandate than Paul Ryan's tax credit. Saying you don't give a **** about it doesn't address the subject.
    I'll pull a Harshaw here and say that you really DO give a **** about it, but you have no answer to it and so you're trying to blow it off.
    I don't need to address the Ryan plan, because 1) it has nothing to do with this Supreme Court case, and 2) I never said a word about it, for it or against it. The Ryan plan has zip, nada, nil, zero to do with this argument in any way, shape, or form. Demanding that I "address" it in some way is completely vapid. It's totally irrelevant, period, full stop.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  6. #636
    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 health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbo View Post
    Your silly alinsky tatics are both transparent and boring.
    You likely don't understand his view based on your comment, but I note you did not address any point being made.

    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.

  7. #637
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:12 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,589

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    If i want to drive I am. Can anyone opt out of health care? How?
    Oddly enough, some religious people go to jail for opting out of it.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  8. #638
    Battle Ready
    Grim17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Southwestern U.S.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    24,138
    Blog Entries
    20

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    If i want to drive I am.
    Exactly... It's your choice.

  9. #639
    Sage
    Erod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:00 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,072

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by xpiher View Post
    I'm sorry but which justice wrote the law?

    The sun always shines on a fool


    Kagan was the Solicitor General who openly rooted and worked on the bill before being appointed to the Supreme Court. She is infinitely unqualified to be on that Court.

    Then-Solicitor General Kagan on Health Care Bill Wrote ‘I hear they have the votes!! Simply amazing’ - ABC News

  10. #640
    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 health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    That's not the issue.

    Look, if you think the solution to this runaway cost problem HAS to include every citizen getting every healthcare service he needs whenever he needs it, then you're stuck with our current runaway cost problem, and all you're doing is desperately trying to find someone to pay the mounting tab.

    But if you want to fix the problem, you have to accept the fact that some people will be denied medical care, because they have no money and they're not insured, and cumulatively we can't fund unlimited health care for all forever.

    Option 1 is stick with our current entitlement mentality re: health care. Give everyone everything they need, and then stick the bill on anyone with any money left in the bank.

    Option 2 is reestablish the financial relationship between provider and patient and face the harsh-ass reality that not everyone can be treated--everyone can't have everything.
    I disagree. I think the obvious best choice is:

    Option 3: establish a French-style single payer system with universal coverage. The government specifies which procedures are covered, how much they will cost, and how much will be paid to providers. The plan covers the vast majority of normal medical care but does not cover cosmetic and other elective surgery, nor does it cover every imagineable end-of-life treatment. If people want coverage for elective procedures and/or coverage for extraordinary end of life treatments they can purchase private insurance to cover those eventualities.

    I don't see how else we can deal with the fact that our doctors are grossly overpaid relative to doctors in other countries, or the fact that we grossly overpay for medications relative to other countries, or the fact that our hospital care is grossly overpriced relative to other countries.

    So it isn't unlimited medical care for everyone, but it is good medical care for everyone, and if it's not good enough then you have the option of paying extra.
    Last edited by AdamT; 03-29-12 at 06:33 PM.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

Posting Permissions

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