• 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!

One man's ObamaCare nightmare[W:51]

Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

Nonsense. Absolute nonsense.


Nope. If I don't like the restrictions placed on me by the ACA I have no recourse. If I don't like my insurance I find a new insurer.

Private insurance is infinitely more granular and custom fitted then the government clustf*** that is the ACA. With the ACA in place I have far less choice between insurance because the douchebag Demcrats think that I should be paying for a bunch of coverage I don't want and will never use regardless of which insurance company I choose.
 
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

Nope. If I don't like the restrictions placed on me by the ACA I have no recourse. If I don't like my insurance I find a new insurer.

Private insurance is infinitely more granular and custom fitted then the government clustf*** that is the ACA. With the ACA in place I have far less choice between insurance because the douchebag Demcrats think that I should be paying for a bunch of coverage I don't want and will never use regardless of which insurance company I choose.

Of course you have recourse. You can buy more. Pay the doctor yourself. Your freedom is as much or more than it's ever been. Why you think exaggeration is a good argument tactic, I don't know. But your going to have to more accurate to really debate this issue. You can't be taken seriously while being this hyperbolic.
 
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

Of course you have recourse. You can buy more. Pay the doctor yourself. Your freedom is as much or more than it's ever been. Why you think exaggeration is a good argument tactic, I don't know. But your going to have to more accurate to really debate this issue. You can't be taken seriously while being this hyperbolic.


No it isn't. Case in point: The mandate. How can you possibly say that my freedom is the same as it was before when one of the central pieces of the legislation takes away my freedom to choose? And that is just the start. There is a litany of things insurance is now required to cover that I don't want. A health care savings plan and a low cost catastrophic insurance plan works wonders for paying the medical bills while protecting my family from catastrophic care bills... but I won't have that choice anymore.

You are simply lying to yourself if you think you are somehow more free with this bill.

Only a liberal could think the path to freedom is through greater regulation. :roll:
 
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

I get the point you are making. However, expecting people to spend 20 or 30 years in the military, do what they are required to do for what they get paid, something else has to be offered. Health care has been the standard thing offered and agreed upon by the government and the service member. The funny thing about it though, when retired many do not even use it or use it as a secondary cutting the governments cost by a lot. They end up working somewhere else because the retired pay just isn't enough and they take their new employers insurance or that of their spouse. That will be changing now of course because of Obamacare. The government will soon be stuck paying the full amount for what they agreed to with each retired service member which of course taxpayers will have to pay for.
Giving government employees pensions and healthcare is bad unless it's the military, then it's the best thing ever.
 
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

Giving government employees pensions and healthcare is bad unless it's the military, then it's the best thing ever.

If you say so.
 
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

No it isn't. Case in point: The mandate. How can you possibly say that my freedom is the same as it was before when one of the central pieces of the legislation takes away my freedom to choose? And that is just the start. There is a litany of things insurance is now required to cover that I don't want. A health care savings plan and a low cost catastrophic insurance plan works wonders for paying the medical bills while protecting my family from catastrophic care bills... but I won't have that choice anymore.

You are simply lying to yourself if you think you are somehow more free with this bill.

Only a liberal could think the path to freedom is through greater regulation. :roll:

Without the mandate/penalty you end up with a horrible crisis of the commons. Loss of a certain degree of freedom is something you have to deal with when you choose to live in any society. The freedom to take what you want, the freedom to physically assault other people, the freedom to not pay taxes; it's a long list.....

Liberty isn't The One, it's one of The Three, and you can't have 100% freedom AND the other 2.
 
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

A health care savings plan and a low cost catastrophic insurance plan works wonders for paying the medical bills while protecting my family from catastrophic care bills... but I won't have that choice anymore.

Those will be called bronze plans in the new marketplaces.
 
I have no issue with posting my gross income year over year. Takes me all of 10 minutes to go into my gun room and get page 1 from each year. I put them in a stack each year when my accountant sends me my copy. I guarantee I pay more in taxes than you make in a year, and more probably pay twice in taxes than you make in a year. You get the board owner or a lawyer to take a bet and I will forward my SSN and copies, and I will put $100K on the bet that says I pay more in taxes than you claim as your gross income. Put up or shut up.

First I enlisted in Utah while in college and upon graduation from my undergrad moved back to CT and I was in the 103rd TCS in Orange CT and a 3POX1. I was called to active for Desert Shield / Desert Storm. I was then in the 94th Airlift at Dobbins ARB for 11 years. From there I moved back to NY (where I was born) and transferred into the 174th. Earlier this year I separated and went into the USAF Civil Air Patrol and I am learning how to fly Cessna 182's. CAP is at the 174th with the NY-135 and that's how I got turned on to CAP. I am in the NY-176.

You don't even have a clue what "independently wealthy is" because you are poor. It basically means you have enough in the bank to retire. I don't. I need my money to double one more time (and god willing I can double it twice). I waste time on boards because I am between client contracts. The only silliness here is food stamp licking armchair quarterbacks such as yourself that think you are carrying the weight of America with your laughable $30K or $60K salary. I have made more than that in a week back when SAP contracts paid $350/hr. Now they pay much less than that; but I have made upwards of $180K in a month before and I doubt highly you have ever made anywhere near that. That's why I have no problem making a $100K bet that you are a whining little nothing that actually doesn't carry anyone with your taxes. So before you go off again telling me how I want something for nothing, you better clue the heck in and realize I just want something back for all the money I spent carrying the likes of your sorry butt.

As a veteran myself, I thank you for your service.

However, I don't believe I even so much as indicated that I or anyone else what, or is interested in what you make, or what you have. who cares?

I remember people like you growing up. My family were members of the country club, and most people there were ok, but there were a few that thought that they were better than others because of their wealth. They were generally self absorbed, rude, classless pricks.
 
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

No it isn't. Case in point: The mandate. How can you possibly say that my freedom is the same as it was before when one of the central pieces of the legislation takes away my freedom to choose? And that is just the start. There is a litany of things insurance is now required to cover that I don't want. A health care savings plan and a low cost catastrophic insurance plan works wonders for paying the medical bills while protecting my family from catastrophic care bills... but I won't have that choice anymore.

You are simply lying to yourself if you think you are somehow more free with this bill.

Only a liberal could think the path to freedom is through greater regulation. :roll:

The mandate doesn't deny you, but instead gives you coverage. You are not denied insurance. you're not denied care. Care isn't run by the government. Like with auto insurance, you're merely mandated to be responsible so that others don't have to carry the burden of your irresponsibility.

And we've always had regulations. It's part of the world. And these are born by a free people. You will find far fewer regulations in a dictatorship, or in any abusively run government. Government doesn't favor regulations. People push for them in order to deal with a problem that has been identified. Most are largely ground up efforts and not top down.

A health care savings plan has real limits. It would only really help a small percentage of people. It simply lacks the impact to be viable as the centerpiece of any plan. It certainly can be an aspect, but largely would make little to no noticeable difference.

And you do have choice. Just as a driver has a choice. But as it should be, choices have consequences.
 
We need to bookmark this thread so we can come back to it in say a couple of months or a year. I want to see if the song is still the same when everybody sees what their rates are really going to be. I am currently paying more for our health insurance plan (healthy family of 3) than I pay for my house. It has gone up 35% in the past year, and that is mild. We get our insurance thru my wife's job as a medical lab tech. When the increase came down I looked in to other private options and found that they were even more expensive. I suspect when all these 20 somethings who choose not to carry health insurance are forced to they will be tweeting about it. At least, when they are forced to do it after they are not able to be on mom and dad's plan anymore. Until then they will continue to tell us how awesome this scam is. What was the quote about socialism being great until you run out of other people's money?
 
No the whole purpose was to overload the current system, break it, and replace it with government controlled single payer. Classic Cloward and Piven......

I guess I should have qualified it by says that was the purported reason.
 
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

Without the mandate/penalty you end up with a horrible crisis of the commons. Loss of a certain degree of freedom is something you have to deal with when you choose to live in any society. The freedom to take what you want, the freedom to physically assault other people, the freedom to not pay taxes; it's a long list.....

Liberty isn't The One, it's one of The Three, and you can't have 100% freedom AND the other 2.

We can argue that point if you wish, but the point I was making was that the legislation infringes on my rights, it doesn't expand them as the poster, or Obama are suggesting.

Also, arguing that a reduction in freedom is necessary price for the functionality of a given government program is not an intrinsic defense of the cost. It is asking that I pay a price for something I don't even want (both in actual dollars and in my personal freedom).
 
Last edited:
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

I heard their only going to help 11 million uninsured instead of the 22 million they originally planned for. The whole purpose of this idiot program was to help the uninsured, WTF??

U.S. government scales back Obamacare impact for 2014 | Reuters

It doesn't go far enough. That's why liberals aren't thrilled with the law. It is too much steeped in republican ideas. If we were serious on the point you bring up, we'd go with UHC.
 
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

Those will be called bronze plans in the new marketplaces.

No they aren't. Bronze plans are not catastrophic coverage plans, they are high deductible plans.

Catastrophic coverage plans only cover major medical events like broken bones, heart attacks, cancer, etc. They cover nothing else. All the small charges for antibiotics or doctors visits, etc. are paid out of pocket, and with a health savings plan I get to sock money away for those expenses tax free. It is MUCH cheaper than a full coverage plan and just as functional.

That arrangement is not available to me under ACA because I am too old and make too much money by the new law. I get shoved into the abysmal comprehensive plans.
 
Last edited:
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

It doesn't go far enough. That's why liberals aren't thrilled with the law. It is too much steeped in republican ideas. If we were serious on the point you bring up, we'd go with UHC.

OMG, are you still blaming the Republicans for passing this law. You people always come up with talking points to blame the Republicans for laws they voted against. I can have an idea too, but just because I think of it doesn't mean I want it passed. At some point you have to take responsibility for voting for that law and own it. I'm against UHC too. This law is purely leftwing incrementalism, and I think it's going to be a disaster. But you people wanted it, and the Supreme Court okayed it as a tax.
 
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

The mandate doesn't deny you, but instead gives you coverage. You are not denied insurance. you're not denied care. Care isn't run by the government. Like with auto insurance, you're merely mandated to be responsible so that others don't have to carry the burden of your irresponsibility.

And we've always had regulations. It's part of the world. And these are born by a free people. You will find far fewer regulations in a dictatorship, or in any abusively run government. Government doesn't favor regulations. People push for them in order to deal with a problem that has been identified. Most are largely ground up efforts and not top down.

A health care savings plan has real limits. It would only really help a small percentage of people. It simply lacks the impact to be viable as the centerpiece of any plan. It certainly can be an aspect, but largely would make little to no noticeable difference.

And you do have choice. Just as a driver has a choice. But as it should be, choices have consequences.


Man, you REALLY don't get it. The government isn't giving me jacksh**. I AM PAYING FOR IT.

And you are wrong, the healthcare savings plan would help a lot of people. If, say, Company A is paying 70% of an employee's health insurance on a $12000/year coverage, that is $8400 a year contributed by the employer. In the system I use the employer could pay 70% into a $6000/year catastrophic plan and $3000/year into a health savings plan for far less less cost and the average person would have a huge health savings plan by the time they retire.

In fact, the only people who would fall short in such a plan are those who have a catastrophic illness before they amass enough in their health savings plan to meet the deductible.

Depending on the plan that would be as little as 1-3 years. The number of people who would contract a catastrophic illness in that time would be a very small percent.

This choice has been taken off the table for most Americans.
 
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

We can argue that point if you wish, but the point I was making was that the legislation infringes on my rights, it doesn't expand them as the poster, or Obama are suggesting.

Also, arguing that a reduction in freedom is necessary price for the functionality of a given government program is not an intrinsic defense of the cost. It is asking that I pay a price for something I don't even want (both in actual dollars and in my personal freedom).

Fair enough. But you're saying you have the right to insure yourself as you see fit. I would have no problem with this if taxpayers didn't have to foot the bill when your cheap insurance (or lack there of for many many people) comes up short. When emergency rooms became legally obligated to treat anyone who walks through their doors, despite ability to pay, mandatory insurance of a certain caliber became an inevitability. And the longer we wait the more painful it will be.
 
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

Man, you REALLY don't get it. The government isn't giving me jacksh**. I AM PAYING FOR IT.

And you are wrong, the healthcare savings plan would help a lot of people. If, say, Company A is paying 70% of an employee's health insurance on a $12000/year coverage, that is $8400 a year contributed by the employer. In the system I use the employer could pay 70% into a $6000/year catastrophic plan and $3000/year into a health savings plan for far less less cost and the average person would have a huge health savings plan by the time they retire.

In fact, the only people who would fall short in such a plan are those who have a catastrophic illness before they amass enough in their health savings plan to meet the deductible.

Depending on the plan that would be as little as 1-3 years. The number of people who would contract a catastrophic illness in that time would be a very small percent.

This choice has been taken off the table for most Americans.

No one said they were giving you ****. They were merely setting the (HIGHER) standards for insurance, which there was cause to do, and requiring you to be responsible.

And people do in fact need huge amount of health care dollars before they retire. No matter how large or small that umber, it happens, and it is passed on to the rest of us. That's why republicans used to support it.

Routine care, while less expensive, is also something that is on going. Many of the working poor have to make more difficult decisions, and health care is often left unmet. This does a few things. One they are set up to have more health problems. And this leads to more serious issues later on, and then we pay for it. The mistake your side makes is you miss a rather large chunk of working people who don't qualify for government aid, but don't really make enough to adequately handle health care needs. You speak too often to the ends, but not the middle. Your plans will have no real impact there.
 
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

OMG, are you still blaming the Republicans for passing this law. You people always come up with talking points to blame the Republicans for laws they voted against. I can have an idea too, but just because I think of it doesn't mean I want it passed. At some point you have to take responsibility for voting for that law and own it. I'm against UHC too. This law is purely leftwing incrementalism, and I think it's going to be a disaster. But you people wanted it, and the Supreme Court okayed it as a tax.

For passing it, no. For pretending it's radical liberalism, yes. Do pay attention.
 
Republicans had no input in crafting it, and were locked out.

No. republicans stated they would do anything to derail, and thus removed themselves from the process. You can't declare you'll oppose anything and expect a seat at the table. And don't make anyone link that quote again for you.
 
No. republicans stated they would do anything to derail, and thus removed themselves from the process. You can't declare you'll oppose anything and expect a seat at the table. And don't make anyone link that quote again for you.

That is a misleading lie. Demos didn't want to negotiate anything. Still don't.
 
Re: One man's ObamaCare nightmare

Fair enough. But you're saying you have the right to insure yourself as you see fit. I would have no problem with this if taxpayers didn't have to foot the bill when your cheap insurance (or lack there of for many many people) comes up short. When emergency rooms became legally obligated to treat anyone who walks through their doors, despite ability to pay, mandatory insurance of a certain caliber became an inevitability. And the longer we wait the more painful it will be.

I'm not asking you to foot the bill, and in my system you wouldn't have to foot the bill because I am covering BOTH the cost of insurance and the cost of the deductible through my health savings plan.

Also, the nice thing about a health savings plan is that I can carry it over, and when the time comes that the current system is no longer serviceable I can use the savings I have amassed in that account to pay for or partially subsidize a more comprehensive plan that I CHOOSE.

But that is all broken now because douchebag Democrats can't seem to "fix" anything anymore without destroying it first.
 
Back
Top Bottom