• 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!

House Bill Defunds Health Care

Verax said:
Obamacare passed whether you like it or not.

You think you can pin this on the Democrats? Good luck buddy, I haven't heard even the most fervent conservatives suggest this.
Click to expand...

That wasn't the question, was it? Your partisan slip is showing...
 
aberrant85 said:
I want substance, not metaphor. What makes everyone lose?
Click to expand...

The fact that people will lose the health care plans they all ready on. Many Companies will make full time employees to part time because it will be to expensive for them. You will be fined by the government if you don't have health care coverage. If you do keep your current plan you will be paying more for less.
 
damn cpgrad sure as hell sounds like a loser deal for everyone to me
 
aberrant85 said:
Did he, now?

"Debbie Bosanek, a spokesman for Buffett, told Business Insider that she alerted Buffett to the quote, and said he was shocked that it was attributed to him.

"It is a very false representation," Bosanek said. "Mr. Buffett never, ever said Obamacare should be scrapped. He never said it, and he never thought it."

Defund Obamacare? Warren Buffett Quote Spurs GOP Hope - Business Insider
Click to expand...

Just as well, the man doesn't have to live under Obamacare, so why should he say anything.
 
cpgrad08 said:
The fact that people will lose the health care plans they all ready on. Many Companies will make full time employees to part time because it will be to expensive for them. You will be fined by the government if you don't have health care coverage. If you do keep your current plan you will be paying more for less.
Click to expand...

I am sure that some companies will do that. I'm sure some companies will not. To me that seems no different than how many companies operate right now. Why don't we see how it goes?

You might pay more for health care, but you might pay less. And you might pay more without the law anyway, there's nothing stopping your insurance company. But it is absolutely false that you will receive less. There will no longer be caps on your coverage, and preventive care, childhood immunizations and adult vaccinations, and medical screenings will be covered by your premium and not cost any extra.
 
aberrant85 said:
Second, I know it's typical liberal bleeding-heart stuff, but if health care gets a little more expensive and covers a little more people, I think that's the morally superior option.
Click to expand...

The problem is that the cost will be a good bit more than a little more expensive. And I think that the coverage of other people is a mirage mostly.

I don't see how it will be more "scarce" if more people receive it.
Click to expand...

If you do not pay the doctors and other health care workers their due then there will be fewer such people and they will be scarcer. If you do not pay hospitals and other facilities a reasonable for use of high tech equipment then some of the existing equipment will eventually be retired and do not expect any to be replaced or newer toch equipment to be funded.


And Americans receive worse health care for more money than other parts of the world already, so that's not an argument to go back to the status quo.
Click to expand...

The costs of health care tend to be due to how government has interfered with the existing market and how it doesn't require transparency giving the patient knowledge to manage the costs. States choose which insurance companies are allowed to do business in their State they restrict what types of heath care that insurance companies can offer (such as the Cadillac Plans only). The hospitals that charge a $1.50 for a OTC pain pill that would cost the hospital $0.05 or so and other such inflated services tacked on.

And with respect to the quality of the health care, if we get the health care we get it sooner that other countries. We do not have to wait months for a procedure that at most would take a few weeks and mostly would take a few days. Cancer patients lifespan without treatment are often measured in months and I would not trust myself to a foreign system that would make me wait long enough where I could die before their bureaucracy will approve and get an appointment for treatment.

We do not need the status quo. What is necessary is a reform of heath care not a raising of it.
 
aberrant85 said:
I am sure that some companies will do that. I'm sure some companies will not. To me that seems no different than how many companies operate right now. Why don't we see how it goes?

You might pay more for health care, but you might pay less. And you might pay more without the law anyway, there's nothing stopping your insurance company. But it is absolutely false that you will receive less. There will no longer be caps on your coverage, and preventive care, childhood immunizations and adult vaccinations, and medical screenings will be covered by your premium and not cost any extra.
Click to expand...

It's a miracle.
 
Shadow Serious said:
The problem is that the cost will be a good bit more than a little more expensive. And I think that the coverage of other people is a mirage mostly.



If you do not pay the doctors and other health care workers their due then there will be fewer such people and they will be scarcer. If you do not pay hospitals and other facilities a reasonable for use of high tech equipment then some of the existing equipment will eventually be retired and do not expect any to be replaced or newer toch equipment to be funded.




The costs of health care tend to be due to how government has interfered with the existing market and how it doesn't require transparency giving the patient knowledge to manage the costs. States choose which insurance companies are allowed to do business in their State they restrict what types of heath care that insurance companies can offer (such as the Cadillac Plans only). The hospitals that charge a $1.50 for a OTC pain pill that would cost the hospital $0.05 or so and other such inflated services tacked on.

And with respect to the quality of the health care, if we get the health care we get it sooner that other countries. We do not have to wait months for a procedure that at most would take a few weeks and mostly would take a few days. Cancer patients lifespan without treatment are often measured in months and I would not trust myself to a foreign system that would make me wait long enough where I could die before their bureaucracy will approve and get an appointment for treatment.

We do not need the status quo. What is necessary is a reform of heath care not a raising of it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, hospitals can charge $10 for an aspirin. It's sick. So lets build on the law to make everything more transparent. Why would you have to repeal it to do that?
 
aberrant85 said:
There will no longer be caps on your coverage, and preventive care, childhood immunizations and adult vaccinations, and medical screenings will be covered by your premium and not cost any extra.
Click to expand...

American said:
It's a miracle.
Click to expand...

That's the glib dismissal of actual facts that have undercut the conservative position on Obamacare this entire time.
 
aberrant85 said:
That's the glib dismissal of actual facts that have undercut the conservative position on Obamacare this entire time.
Click to expand...

Sure, and all the waivers mean nothing.
 
aberrant85 said:
Insurance companies have been known to gladly take their customers money in the form of premiums, then once they need their insurance for an operation or condition, suddenly the insurance company will unearth a pre-existing condition and drop their customer. According to them, eczema and acne are a preexisting condition.
Click to expand...

If the insurance company violated the contract or has denied a claim for spurious reasons then there should be legal options for the insuree. Furthermore if this is a pattern then the State can bar further enrollees for the company for a time, and if applicable charges of fraud could be leveled. Also the Federal Government should require that the Courts in the State of the enrollee be the one to hear any civil or adjudication case and not the State the insurer is in.

Yes, I get it. They are a business, and business must make money to exist. But when they go to such lengths do deny their services to those that need it the most, doesn't that say something?
Click to expand...

Clarity in what is covered under a particular policy would be a proper role of government. Dictating the acceptable polices would not be however and there should be a free market for various insurance polices providing what is needed.

That said the health care providers must be paid their due. And the due can be quite high if one is getting care from a top notch specialist being examined by equipment that costs a few million dollars.


In my opinion, the private health insurance industry is like the oil industry. Both essentially belong in the 20th century and don't make much sense in the future.[/QUOTE]
 
Deuce said:
It's an effort to usurp legislative power that the GOP does not possess, and the general public is going to realize that. Anyone who blames this potential shutdown on Democrats is already a partisan hack and their opinion was never going to change on the subject.
Click to expand...

The House has the Power of the Purse. Republicans control the House. There is no usurpation since they are within the confines of their role on governance. And there is no reason for the Senate to reject the House bill except for political ends. And the President should sign it also since there is no reason to sign the parts of the budget that have been passed.
 
Shadow Serious said:
If the insurance company violated the contract or has denied a claim for spurious reasons then there should be legal options for the insuree. Furthermore if this is a pattern then the State can bar further enrollees for the company for a time, and if applicable charges of fraud could be leveled. Also the Federal Government should require that the Courts in the State of the enrollee be the one to hear any civil or adjudication case and not the State the insurer is in.

Clarity in what is covered under a particular policy would be a proper role of government. Dictating the acceptable polices would not be however and there should be a free market for various insurance polices providing what is needed.

That said the health care providers must be paid their due. And the due can be quite high if one is getting care from a top notch specialist being examined by equipment that costs a few million dollars.
Click to expand...

I gotta tell ya, a lot of money the hospitals make don't go to doctors, they go to bulls*** projects. I worked at an agency that was hired by a hospital to put a $2 million art installation in a new ward that itself would cost multiple millions. Everyone involved talked about how great it was, but it bothered me that so much money was going into what was essentially a luxury that nobody needed. Better that they save the people who needed the care the money they would have spent. In this sense, people like me that are supportive of Obamacare like it because it at least does something instead of just letting this perverse system go on unchanged.
 
AngryOldGuy said:
Trust my friend it may be unknowable until we arrive but there could be tears and rivers of blood along the way?
Click to expand...

Yes, but those blood and tears are just an Introduction (like a musical piece) before we meet the Leviathan.
 
Verax said:
I don't believe the GOP has any chance of actually changing anything with this... So basically they're holding the country hostage for a period to broadcast just how much they hate Obamacare.
Click to expand...

They have their constituents and are following their will.

What does this accomplish other than getting everyone riled up?
Click to expand...

A lot of people do not want Obama Care and they are playing to that crowd,

Is that really what we want?
Click to expand...

It is the majority of the citizens of the United States opinion.
More pissed off people screaming at the top of their lungs how much they disagree?
Click to expand...

This is politics at its most basic. This is not a gentleman's club where they chastise a fellow for mildly offensive behavior. The leaders in the Republican Party sometimes well, often thinks it is.

Does this lead to a healthier democracy?
Click to expand...

We are not a Democracy. We are a Republic. And if we were a Democracy , Obama Care would not have passed and now since the public knows about Obama Care the majority would hold it not be funded and to be repealed.

I really see no value in this, only negativity and regression.
Click to expand...

Backing out of a Dead End street is not regression; It is correction. And the only negativity I see is from Democrats that refuse to accept that the general public is opposed to this form of health care.

Its a stone's throw away from sabotage which the GOP always denies doing...
Click to expand...

Obama Care is a colossal fubar and this is essentially the last chance to stop it from wrecking this country.
 
I don't get why this matters. The GOP knows it will not fly in the Senate. Even if it did it would be vetoed by Obama. They don't have the votes to override a veto. This is political pageantry. If they pushed it to a government shutdown they would almost certainly be kicking rocks on the midterm elections because as hard as they would try to blame the Democrats for it saying they "passed a bill" they did it in as partisan a way as possible.
 
aberrant85 said:
That's a pretty good explanation for the Republican argument.
Click to expand...

. . .

I still think it's mostly motivated by spite, though.
Click to expand...

Um, no. Definition of spite:


1.a malicious, usually petty, desire to harm, annoy, frustrate, or humiliate another person; bitter ill will; malice.


2.a particular instance of such an attitude or action; grudge.


3.Obsolete . something that causes vexation; annoyance.

Spite | Define Spite at Dictionary.com



I mean, this isn't a socialist law. If anything, it benefits private business (insurance companies), who will get more customers.
Click to expand...

Then it is a Fascist one then.
And believe it or not, there are people that get a job just for the health insurance.
Click to expand...

I've met a person who said he was a millionaire and he got some low skilled job to get health care coverage for his wife. Taken at face value it probably means that there is a problem with the level of medical technology that causes a greater expense and research is needed to lower the costs. If some millionaires are overbowed by the health system then I know of no solution that can be presented if we want to cover everything for everybody.
People like artists take part time jobs that provide health benefits just to get affordable health care.
Click to expand...

Being an artist is a hard row to hoe when in good health. A sick artist. . . .

If you can get the same health care on your own, such people might not seek work, opening up positions for people that have been struggling to find it.
Click to expand...

That is true but Obama Care is not the vehicle to arrive at that sunny place.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, and how much Republican states will try to blunt its success (that's not me saying that, that's Republican governors and state governments).
Click to expand...

They are not trying to blunt its success; They are trying to prevent a dismal failure.

One thing nobody knows is the future, so nobody is smart enough to know if it fails or succeeds.
Click to expand...

It is true that nobody knows the future. But . . .

It may not be that the race is to the swift, nor the battle to the strong - but that is the way to bet. Damon Runyon[/QUOTE]

Quote Details: Damon Runyon: It may not be... - The Quotations Page

I think that the Obama Care will be one of the worst failures this country has ever seen.
Click to expand...
 
Verax said:
Shut down the government because they didn't get their way? That's not a bad thing?

I know in a forum its easy to say "yeah man lets shut the whole thing down!!! wooohooo!!!". In the real world these things have consequences and can badly hurt people who don't deserve it. As I alluded to earlier the GOP isn't going to change anything so again, what is the use in doing this?
Click to expand...

The Republicans passed a bill with everything but Obama Care. It is up to the Democrats to pass it or not. They will be the ones causing a shut down. There is no reason that the bill have to include everything on its budget and those areaa that are agreed to can be passed to avoid this senerio in the first place.
 
Shadow Serious said:
The Republicans passed a bill with everything but Obama Care. It is up to the Democrats to pass it or not. They will be the ones causing a shut down. There is no reason that the bill have to include everything on its budget and those areaa that are agreed to can be passed to avoid this senerio in the first place.
Click to expand...

The Republicans passed a half-assed bill designed to shortchange what had already been passed. They are the ones responsible for a shutdown.

You obviously support defunding it ... own the shutdown.
 
aberrant85 said:
Let's all take a deep breath and remember that THIS IS THE YEAR 2013. We didn't get flying cars, but did anyone think that at this point we still couldn't figure out an operational way of providing people with health care when they need it?
Click to expand...

Actually we did get flying cars but the government will not allow them to be used. And it is somewhat more likely that under present technology we would be able to build a Death Star than have a coverage to health care to all with the government trying to mess with all the parts of health care to the degree it is. Even though I am a Libertarian and do not belive government should do so. I could go for single payer but not that the government running the health care establishment. And even if we can manage to keep government out of running the system I can guarntee that the government will deny payment often for health care that "is not needed." So we will be back to step 1 for the health service.
 
cpgrad08 said:
The fact that people will lose the health care plans they all ready on. Many Companies will make full time employees to part time because it will be to expensive for them. You will be fined by the government if you don't have health care coverage. If you do keep your current plan you will be paying more for less.
Click to expand...

Based on what? There is no reason a company would terminate its existing health care plans, and subject themselves to the fines (which are rather stiff) and move good people from full time to part-time. Its non-sense

The impact of ACA is on 50-200 employee companies that do not currently have healthcare for their employees. Only a few companies have to worry about this. I do, happen to have a company that falls in this area.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom