• 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 Slaps States That Don't Comply With Obamacare

I'm not entirely sure why you expect that I will talk of something that you brought up out of the wind when responding to a comment of mine. I have no interest in this talk and like I said, it does not lower cost and has no real ability to control them either. Parroting myths is not something I find smart and is not something I will humor with you today.

You ask and started the conversation. I'm not speaking of myths. The fact is those systems pay less. I can understand that you don't really want to confront that FACT.
 
You ask and started the conversation. I'm not speaking of myths. The fact is those systems pay less. I can understand that you don't really want to confront that FACT.

What?

I already confronted it.
 
I don't think so.

You can think whatever you want but when I tell you the cost in such a system has only ever went up your point is rather weak. The introduction of such an idea has never lowered cost. So what are you really talking about? The state of cost at this moment? Well, I don't see the point in that.
 
You can think whatever you want but when I tell you the cost in such a system has only ever went up your point is rather weak. The introduction of such an idea has never lowered cost. So what are you really talking about? The state of cost at this moment? Well, I don't see the point in that.

Are you admitting we pay more? We keep going up. You want to keep digging that hole, or stop and do something that makes sense.

Again, facts:

1) they spend less in those systems.

2) you can remove healthcare from employment.

3) more people have better access.


So, what exactly is you compliant?
 
So you don't think that some other party in power would abuse power? Absolute power corrupts absolutely. We could have 27 parties and the person in charge would be subject to abusing the power of the office. You voted Gary Johnson, well rudy poo for you. Had you and your band of merry contrarian dope advocates had realized the importance of this election and voted rationally to remove this dictator wanna be, we wouldn't be rushing head long into the demise we are pressing the gas pedal to the floor to get to. Thanks for that.

And trade one dictator for another, because that dictator is YOUR guy? Didn't happen this year. Won't happen 4 years from now either. Keep dreaming.
 
Residents of states that refuse to set up health insurance exchanges under Obamacare are set to be hit with higher premiums under new rules announced by the Health and Human Services Department.

Insurance companies will be charged 3.5 percent of any premiums they sell through the federal exchanges, the department announced Friday.

And insurers are likely to pass that surcharge on to clients, leaading to higher premiums.

The only states to be affected are those that refuse to set up their own exchanges because of opposition to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. They are almost certain to be those under Republican control. In those states, HHS will set up the exchanges.

Read more: Obama Slaps States That Refuse to Comply With Obamacare


I can suggest not to buy healthcare in an exchange.

Another wealth transfer from producers to the recipients. The left is defunding the right...hopefully soon they will run out of other peoples money.
And 51% of Americans fully approve of this by default.
 
Nth is all sounds like more whining to me. Don't like the law, get work making it better. You'd have me with a two tiered single payer system. But jump in. Work make better. Whining rarely solves anything.

No whining to it Joe just pointing out how progressives operate. On your single payer system, not to worry, that was always the end game for Obama and co. You'll just have to wait til this opening salvo breaks the system first, as was intended.
 
No whining to it Joe just pointing out how progressives operate. On your single payer system, not to worry, that was always the end game for Obama and co. You'll just have to wait til this opening salvo breaks the system first, as was intended.

No, it's whining. And you give Obama too much credit. But what have is largely the fault of republicans and the Tea Party, with the death panel scare and the like. I know being responsible for their actions is difficult for them, but reality is reality.

;)
 
And trade one dictator for another, because that dictator is YOUR guy? Didn't happen this year. Won't happen 4 years from now either. Keep dreaming.

Ugh. The utter smugness of these neo libertarians is near too much to handle. When Obama takes into total collapse, rejoice and take responsibility for your part in it pal.
 
The thread title... I just can't help getting a vision of Obama B**** slapping people lol.
 
I'm confused. Was Obamacare not upheld 5-4 by SCOTUS? I've been wrong before but I was pretty sure that John Roberts was the deciding vote, much to the dismay of many.

Every President gets a library and also a fancy inauguration. I view it as a slap in the face to us commoners. It's just a big party for those who pay less taxes than you do because they make more money than you do:). Even the worst Presidents get a free legacy. But right now, Obama thinks he is King and you know what - he is the King. Not sure what that says about us but it is what it is...

Yeah it was.....and? "Did you think just because they ruled on that issue of Constitutionality. That there wouldn't be others? You do know that the Obamabaloney Will.....be broken down. There will be some changes, some things will be scaled back. Either in time or money. One thing is for Sure.....that shiznit they did not read. All of it will not be implemented. So when the Democrats that don't agree with Obama brings those issues out. Do you think Obama will Blame them for upsetting his Apple-cart?
 
Hmm ... so no one is going to challenge Newsmax's obviously slanted coverage of this story? How odd.

Newsmax's spin is that the administration is instituting this fee as a punitive measure to punish red states. The truth is that this is an administrative fee to cover the cost of setting up the exchanges: a fee that states that do set up their own exchanges will have to mirror in some respect to cover the same expense. Obviously the insurance companies do receive a significant benefit from participating in the exchange (access to huge market, reduced need for advertising, lower own-administrative expenses), so it is logical that they should cover at least part of the expense.
 
No, it's whining.

Not at all. It is called opposing something. I know that progressives would just love it if the Conservatives and Republicans would just be quiet, and allow all the progressive failures to be hung on them instead of having to take responsibility for what they put in place, but alas, you'll just have to grow up and acknowledge the foul ups that are Obama's.

But what have is largely the fault of republicans and the Tea Party, with the death panel scare and the like.


And here you go, proving my point....Tell me what the republicans, or TP had to do with writing this monstrosity, or for that matter voting it into law? The lie here is so transparent that in a face to face conversation, I doubt you'd be able to even utter that lie without busting out laughing. As for the "Death Panels" that was a term true enough based out of not knowing, or having access to the exact wording of the legislation until literally hours before the Christmas Eve at midnight vote, but a form of that does indeed exist, in the IPAB. Now you can continue to deny that as well, but it just isn't honest.

I know being responsible for their actions is difficult for them, but reality is reality.

That is some astonishing projection you have going on there Joe....
 
Hmm ... so no one is going to challenge Newsmax's obviously slanted coverage of this story? How odd.

Newsmax's spin is that the administration is instituting this fee as a punitive measure to punish red states. The truth is that this is an administrative fee to cover the cost of setting up the exchanges: a fee that states that do set up their own exchanges will have to mirror in some respect to cover the same expense. Obviously the insurance companies do receive a significant benefit from participating in the exchange (access to huge market, reduced need for advertising, lower own-administrative expenses), so it is logical that they should cover at least part of the expense.


Oh, did Newsmax misreport something? Is the fee going to be spread on all state exchange insurances equally? Or is this just going to be levied on those states where the Federal government has to set up their traps themselves?
 
"I think states should be able to ignore the law when they feel like it!"

Yeah, ok buddy. Incidentally, you don't have to buy health insurance from an exchange if you don't want to.

Which part of an insurance exchange strikes you as "wealth transfer?"

You are talking about the beginnings of a national Civil Disobedience Movement.
I share you hopes.

Violence will not solve anything, but if the states simply begin to refuse to accept and implement unreasonable federal dictates and pass them on to their citizens I think we may finally begin to see real change. Will take extremely brave politicians and a constituency absolutely stead-fast in their support, however I think we may see the beginnings of this with our Governors.

Probably too much to hope for, but without hope, what is left?
 
I can't predict the ultimate outcome and sadder yet - neither can the authors.

The only point I was trying to make, with some confidence, was that this bloated bill WAS constitutional until something makes it otherwise.

I'd prefer to hope for the best instead of the worst. Some things are easy to call - this isn't one of them.


Yeah it was.....and? "Did you think just because they ruled on that issue of Constitutionality. That there wouldn't be others? You do know that the Obamabaloney Will.....be broken down. There will be some changes, some things will be scaled back. Either in time or money. One thing is for Sure.....that shiznit they did not read. All of it will not be implemented. So when the Democrats that don't agree with Obama brings those issues out. Do you think Obama will Blame them for upsetting his Apple-cart?
 
Ugh. The utter smugness of these neo libertarians is near too much to handle. When Obama takes into total collapse, rejoice and take responsibility for your part in it pal.

I don't vote for people just because they have an R after their name, like you do. I vote for people who actually stand for something. People are not defined by the BS they tell you. They are defined by what THEY ACTUALLY DO!! At this point, the Republican Party is all political BS talk with no real effort to solve the problems we are facing today. Like I said before, I have absolutely no problem voting the way I did, and until the GOP makes an effort to put America over party, then I have no plans to vote for them in the near future. As for the far future, I will wait and see what they ACTUALLY DO before making a decision. If the Republican party wants me back, they are going to have to earn my vote. I don't just whore it out.
 
I don't vote for people just because they have an R after their name, like you do. I vote for people who actually stand for something. People are not defined by the BS they tell you. They are defined by what THEY ACTUALLY DO!! At this point, the Republican Party is all political BS talk with no real effort to solve the problems we are facing today. Like I said before, I have absolutely no problem voting the way I did, and until the GOP makes an effort to put America over party, then I have no plans to vote for them in the near future. As for the far future, I will wait and see what they ACTUALLY DO before making a decision. If the Republican party wants me back, they are going to have to earn my vote. I don't just whore it out.


Well, see this is what I am talking about, you have no problem categorizing me, or how I vote because I tend to oppose this current administration and what they are doing to this country. I voted Romney sure. Did I agree with every aspect of what he was saying? no, not really, but I understood what the stakes were, and instead of voting for someone who had absolutely NO chance of winning, I chose to cast my vote for hope of changing the course, if even so slightly to slow it down, and work on mid terms, and build.

Johnson struggled to get 1% of the vote, and a case could be made that momentum swung the states, the further west one looked. So, you can tell yourself what ever gets you through the night friend, but in the end, you libertarians aided in putting Obama back in, own it. It really isn't a surprise seeing that most of the Pauliacs I have read in the past year mirror closer to democrats in attitude, and substance than repubs anyway.
 
Not at all. It is called opposing something. I know that progressives would just love it if the Conservatives and Republicans would just be quiet, and allow all the progressive failures to be hung on them instead of having to take responsibility for what they put in place, but alas, you'll just have to grow up and acknowledge the foul ups that are Obama's.

No. Opposing something is when you say, "I disagree with that and think you should do this." Whining exaggerates, says, poor, poor us being picked on by that mean Obama. Whining.



And here you go, proving my point....Tell me what the republicans, or TP had to do with writing this monstrosity, or for that matter voting it into law? The lie here is so transparent that in a face to face conversation, I doubt you'd be able to even utter that lie without busting out laughing. As for the "Death Panels" that was a term true enough based out of not knowing, or having access to the exact wording of the legislation until literally hours before the Christmas Eve at midnight vote, but a form of that does indeed exist, in the IPAB. Now you can continue to deny that as well, but it just isn't honest.

A lot. Many of the ideas in it are republican ideas. That's just a fact. Romney, who you would have elected, laid out a lot of the ground work. He even said he'd have kept everything but the way to pay for it.

But even that mandate has conservative roots:

The mandate, requiring every American to purchase health insurance, appeared in a 1989 published proposal by Stuart M. Butler of the conservative Heritage Foundation called "Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans," which included a provision to "mandate all households to obtain adequate insurance."

The Heritage Foundation "substantially revised" its proposal four years later, according to a 1994 analysis by the Congressional Budget Office. But the idea of an individual health insurance mandate later appeared in two bills introduced by Republican lawmakers in 1993, according to the non-partisan research group ProCon.org. Among the supporters of the bills were senators Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, who today oppose the mandate under current law.

Read more: Individual health care insurance mandate has roots two decades long | Fox News


Add to it that republicans (and the tea party) did derail any honest discourse with the death panel and socialist nonsense, you have to take some responsibility for what happened. Not total responsibility (as I'm not the hack here blaming one side for everything). But part of it.



That is some astonishing projection you have going on there Joe....

It's not me blaming the media, or the radical right, or anything but the people involved.
 
No. Opposing something is when you say, "I disagree with that and think you should do this." Whining exaggerates, says, poor, poor us being picked on by that mean Obama. Whining.


I am not whining about anything, now stop with the silliness and address the topic like an adult please.

A lot. Many of the ideas in it are republican ideas. That's just a fact. Romney, who you would have elected, laid out a lot of the ground work. He even said he'd have kept everything but the way to pay for it.

But even that mandate has conservative roots:

The mandate, requiring every American to purchase health insurance, appeared in a 1989 published proposal by Stuart M. Butler of the conservative Heritage Foundation called "Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans," which included a provision to "mandate all households to obtain adequate insurance."

The Heritage Foundation "substantially revised" its proposal four years later, according to a 1994 analysis by the Congressional Budget Office. But the idea of an individual health insurance mandate later appeared in two bills introduced by Republican lawmakers in 1993, according to the non-partisan research group ProCon.org. Among the supporters of the bills were senators Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, who today oppose the mandate under current law.

Read more: Individual health care insurance mandate has roots two decades long | Fox News


Add to it that republicans (and the tea party) did derail any honest discourse with the death panel and socialist nonsense, you have to take some responsibility for what happened. Not total responsibility (as I'm not the hack here blaming one side for everything). But part of it.


Wow, how utterly false can you be....Here is a Heritage Foundation statement on Obamacare....


"Obamacare puts the health care system on the wrong track and will expand the role of the federal government in every component of Americans’ health care. To get the health care system on the right track that empowers patients, reduces cost, and ensures access, Obamacare must be repealed."

Obamacare

So obviously demo's changed it enough to make it NOT what Heritage was proposing.

As for what republicans had to do with Obamacare, that would be nothing...Hell, Pelosi even changed the rules so that they couldn't have a say....

It's not me blaming the media, or the radical right, or anything but the people involved.

No, but it is you being dishonest about Obamacare.
 
Oh, did Newsmax misreport something? Is the fee going to be spread on all state exchange insurances equally? Or is this just going to be levied on those states where the Federal government has to set up their traps themselves?

No, they didn't misreport -- they just misrepresented. Of course the federal exchange fee isn't going to be charged to states that won't be using the federal exchanges. Those states will incur their own costs setting up state exchanges. Hello?
 
I am not whining about anything, now stop with the silliness and address the topic like an adult please.




Wow, how utterly false can you be....Here is a Heritage Foundation statement on Obamacare....


"Obamacare puts the health care system on the wrong track and will expand the role of the federal government in every component of Americans’ health care. To get the health care system on the right track that empowers patients, reduces cost, and ensures access, Obamacare must be repealed."

Obamacare

So obviously demo's changed it enough to make it NOT what Heritage was proposing.

As for what republicans had to do with Obamacare, that would be nothing...Hell, Pelosi even changed the rules so that they couldn't have a say....



No, but it is you being dishonest about Obamacare.

I'm sorry j, but I linked them. You confuse one thing with another. And the only people being dishonest are those whining about health reform. Factually, republican ideas are all through it.

And j, there is nothing silly about calling the whining what is. If you need more links, a fill this thread up with them. The facts are the facts.
 
Residents of states that refuse to set up health insurance exchanges under Obamacare are set to be hit with higher premiums under new rules announced by the Health and Human Services Department.

Insurance companies will be charged 3.5 percent of any premiums they sell through the federal exchanges, the department announced Friday.

And insurers are likely to pass that surcharge on to clients, leaading to higher premiums.

The only states to be affected are those that refuse to set up their own exchanges because of opposition to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. They are almost certain to be those under Republican control. In those states, HHS will set up the exchanges.

Read more: Obama Slaps States That Refuse to Comply With Obamacare


I can suggest not to buy healthcare in an exchange.

Another wealth transfer from producers to the recipients. The left is defunding the right...hopefully soon they will run out of other peoples money.

I think it's the right thing to do.

Look, the PPACA provides block grants to the states to set up their HIEs. As such, no state really has to spend a dime. Moreover, the Treasury would provide additional non-matching funds for Medicaid for the first 2-yrs once the PPACA goes into effect in 2014. Yet, Republican governors are refusing to establish the state-sponsored HIEs even after most of them stated publically they'd hold off starting them until after the election - a clear indication that if Romney won they'd do nothing except wait for the law to be repealed. But that wait-and-see approach backfired and now these Republican governors have to wait on their congressional Republican colleagues to either defund the PPACA or hope one of their law suits finally wins over the Supreme Court.

It's more obstructionism, plain and simple. Regardless, the law clearly states that if the states choose not to set-up an exchange, the fed would do it for them and charge them accordingly. At this point, those states that continue to refuse to adhere to the law have only themselves to blame and their residents can bitch to their Governor.
 
Back
Top Bottom