Page 81 of 122 FirstFirst ... 3171798081828391 ... LastLast
Results 801 to 810 of 1219

Thread: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

  1. #801
    Professor xpiher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    04-23-12 @ 10:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,993
    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Bold: Congress never amends a law unless two things happen. First and what is the most common reason is that the courts strike a part of a law out. Second and is rarely the reason is if the majority of people cry out about it. Congress loves passing laws but hates amending them or getting rid of them.

    Underlined: Yes it would. And without the mandate insurance companies would fold and if that happens then what are people going to do? We'll be in worse shape than we are now.

    Green: So you would give the government power to dictate that you must buy things? Implanted GPS trackers here we come! Exercise machines here we come!
    Insurance companies can cover sick people without going bankrupt by designing policies that reflect the increased exposure, dint cover said condition etc. however, I do believe that what should happen is for the federal government to tell states to **** themselves and undo all state "health insurance must cover x" laws.

    The sun always shines on a fool
    Hayek - too liberal for republicans

  2. #802
    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 Arbo View Post
    You have seriously never heard of a local hospital owned by a city or county?
    It was seriously suggested that there are hospitals supposedly operated by state or federal government. As far as city or county-owned hospitals go, I've lived in five major metropolitan areas in my life and I've never heard of one. Maybe it's a rural thing?
    Last edited by AdamT; 03-31-12 at 02:21 AM.
    "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

  3. #803
    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
    It is not my 'experience', it is the reality of all those places.
    I don't think so. Have anything we can view and affirm your "reality?"

    Now this is in context of this being larger than any other factor for the cost. But I will say this, it is the great number of different insurance companies that led to all the paper work (something cut down over recent years). The only real way to correct your problem is to have only one insurer, or univerisal standards and guidelines. The market won't reduce paper work.
    Last edited by Boo Radley; 03-31-12 at 09:36 AM.

    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. #804
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    8,351

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    It was seriously suggested that there are hospitals supposedly operated by state or federal government. As far as city or county-owned hospitals go, I've lived in five major metropolitan areas in my life and I've never heard of one. Maybe it's a rural thing?
    Not unless you consider New York City rural.

  5. #805
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,812

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by washunut View Post
    Not unless you consider New York City rural.
    Or Chicago/Cook County.

  6. #806
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,812

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by xpiher View Post
    Insurance companies can cover sick people without going bankrupt by designing policies that reflect the increased exposure, dint cover said condition etc.
    Insurance companies currently do that. It's called a pre-ex exclusion. And it will not cover the excluded condition for (on average) 2 years. After that the condition is covered. So it now sounds like you are fine with pre-ex.

  7. #807
    #NeverTrump
    a351's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Space Coast
    Last Seen
    09-09-17 @ 08:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    6,902

    Re: Supreme Court health care arguments under way

    Quote Originally Posted by jet57 View Post
    Can you elaborate on that please?
    http://www.library.yale.edu/~llicense/sevcls.shtml In short, since the severability clause was not included in the legislation, the justices have the option to strike the bill down in its entirety if they deem the mandate itself is unconstitutional.

  8. #808
    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 AdamT View Post
    It was seriously suggested that there are hospitals supposedly operated by state or federal government. As far as city or county-owned hospitals go, I've lived in five major metropolitan areas in my life and I've never heard of one. Maybe it's a rural thing?
    As others have pointed out to you, no, it is not a 'rural' thing. That being said, you do realize that most of this country is not 'big city' right?

    I know some people think big cities are the only important things/places on earth, but those big cities are the minority of the earth.

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I don't think so.
    I would not have guessed otherwise.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  9. #809
    Professor xpiher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    04-23-12 @ 10:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,993
    Quote Originally Posted by buck View Post
    Insurance companies currently do that. It's called a pre-ex exclusion. And it will not cover the excluded condition for (on average) 2 years. After that the condition is covered. So it now sounds like you are fine with pre-ex.
    I.was never against it. However, iirc, those policies arent offered in every state for various reason. It also doesn't prevent contact termination, refusal to renew, or screwing people who got sick combined with a gap in coverage.
    Hayek - too liberal for republicans

  10. #810
    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 washunut View Post
    Not unless you consider New York City rural.
    No, I wouldn't say NYC is rural. So what is/are the government-owned hospitals in NYC?
    "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

Page 81 of 122 FirstFirst ... 3171798081828391 ... 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
  •