Page 53 of 154 FirstFirst ... 343515253545563103153 ... LastLast
Results 521 to 530 of 1534

Thread: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

  1. #521
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    14,496

    re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by tech30528 View Post
    It's true that it would not work as intended without the exchanges. But the law clearly states that subsidies would only be provided thru state exchanges. The intent was to strongarm the states into shouldering the full expense d o wn the road, another unfunded mandate. The federal government offered to cover the majority of the costs in the beginning (you states would be fools to not do this! It's free!), but then the money fades away in subsequent years. The feds could handle it because the taxes started years before benefits, so essentially we were taxed to collect bribe money and expected to be short sighted enough to ignore the eventual costs. And those who could see past tomorrow were labelled obstructionists.
    But the problem is the states didn't know about this hammer - run your own exchange or your residents get no subsidies - when they were deciding whether or not to run their own exchanges. Congress didn't debate this 'intent' - not a word of debate on this huge issue. When Congress voted, not one Congress person justified his or her vote on this 'intent.' The "intent" wasn't discovered even by Conservatives opposed to the law until a presentation in late 2010 to CEI, 9 months after the bill passed in March. It would take many more months for the 'intent' to develop into a case and pretty much no one, including states deciding their own exchanges, knew about the 'intent' until one of the lawyers published an op-ed in the WSJ that revealed this "intent" to the rest of us, including state officials.

    But there were enough state leaders who COULD see down the road, and much to the dismay of their liberal constituents who tend to beselfish assholes who don't care about broader consequences as long as they get their cookie today, said no. So the tactic didn't work. So now the SC has rigged the game and just given the victory to the current administration anyway. We have officially crossed the line as a n ation. The people are no longer represented in government. The last time that happened.....
    selfish assholes.... Nice job letting us know there isn't even a pretense of being anything but a partisan blowhard. Thanks.

  2. #522
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,425

    re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by ashurbanipal View Post
    I'm not sure where the "logic" remark comes from. Feel free to use as much logic as you want.

    Actually, you do owe me health care, just as I owe you health care. Everyone in society owes everyone else a certain set of duties, and that's one of them. It always has been, since roughly the beginning of the human race. People join societies and take care of each other. In a very large society, such as ours, we pay taxes, and those monies are administered. Usually (unfortunately) they're not administered fairly, and I think we could do better, but that's just how it is. Again, you're free to live under the alternative.
    no I don't owe you anything. you are responsible for yourself. I don't work to pay for you I work to provide for my family. no people don't join socieities to take care of each other.
    no you are free to live in a place where everyone pays for everything for you. I hear cuba, china, north korea are nice this time of year.
    the government will take care of you at other peoples expense.


    What lie did I tell? What I said was not that republicans had squashed the public option, but that conservatives did so.
    Liberals squashed it as well. so yes it was a lie.


    Hmmm...it seems to me this is false.

    Here, for example, is an article apparently paid for by the Heritage Foundation on the subject:

    Competition in the Health Care Market: The Next Revolution
    you need to read the article. obamacare and what is being proposed here is not the same. what they propse is actual competition in the market place obamacare is not competition in the market place. what the article proposes is allowing for people to buy insurance across state lines which is something republicans have proposed for years.

    that is true market competition. obamacare doesn't allow you to buy insurance across state lines.

    They're pretty republican-heavy, aren't they?
    if the article only said what you thought it said but it didn't.

    Also, apparently Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis) thinks this is one of the things Republicans have proposed before:

    Republicans have proposed many solutions to control health care costs and improve quality, Ron Johnson says | PolitiFact

    Ron Paul seems also to think competition would lower costs:

    Health Care
    again one if the big republican plans all along has been to make sure that you can sell insurance across state lines and in truth make it true competition.
    obamacare is not true competition that is why almost all insurance companies are seeking 1-30 and in some cases 70% increases in their premium rates for next year.
    it is why in the first year insurance premiums soared 40% on average across the nation. it is why the 2nd year we saw 20-40% increases.

    I'm sure I could find more if I wanted to spend an hour or two looking for old press releases and such. Now, please note I do not say that conservative democrats didn't harp on the competition bit. Only that republicans did, too.
    Yet none of them say what you think they say.

    Depends on how it's done. I would agree with you that the ACA is far from a perfect solution to our health care problems.
    It doesn't matter how it is done. you can't demand insurance companies provide X services and then think it is going to lower costs.
    it isn't.

  3. #523
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    14,496

    re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by austrianecon View Post
    No, they ruled on their own view of intent as they needed to justify approving it. If they didn't change the intent, it would have 100% failed as under Equal Protection Clause of the 15th Amendment.. You can't provide a subsidy to one and not the other. So to get around it Supreme Court has redefined the words and it's intention by redefining the word State = Federal Government. So by this virtue, and most Democrats will be happy, there is no such thing as State's rights anymore which again, the Supreme Court failed to uphold Constitutional law (10th Amendment).

    Now State = Federal when it doesn't. This is a uber Big Government ruling. Enjoy the ride folks.. this ruling has sealed the deal for me. I am getting the hell out of dodge.
    There isn't an intellectually honest person alive on the planet who believes Congress intended to deny subsidies to the Federally run exchanges. That's not what democrats voted for and republicans voted against. As the "intent" is interpreted by right wingers, the core of the ACA was nothing but a voluntary program and each state had the opportunity to elect in or out of the subsidies, the employer mandate, and the individual mandate. I'm sure that's what conservatives prefer, but that clearly and obviously wasn't what Congress intended when both sides cast their votes.

    BTW we'll miss you. Say hello to Galt when you get there.

  4. #524
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,936

    re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    that is the one flaw in the constitution. there is no check and balance against the SCOTUS. the only thing we can hope now is that in 2016 we get a republican president
    and be able to repeal this law through the same method that it was put in. that way we can avoid the stoppage in the senate.
    The legislature is the check on SCOTUS. They can change the law and impeach judges. This of course assumes that SCOTUS uses the law to make rulings, and doesnt just make stuff up.

  5. #525
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,936

    re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    LOL. Good plan. Should work out for the "we" whoever that is. Just pick and choose what laws to follow and what laws to ignore. Can't see a problem with that....
    Its works for the people in charge.

  6. #526
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,936

    re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by csbrown28 View Post
    So at the risk of thread derailment.....

    My brother, hard core workin man, drives truck, does masonry, plumbing, framing and just about any other tough job that can be done with your hands. hasn't had insurance since he left the Marine Core 25 years ago. Under Obama he get's catastrophic insurance, it costs him like $110 a month and his deductibles are really, crazy high, but if he ever gets mouth cancer from chewing tobacco all these years, the $50,000-$100,000 dollars it would have cost him to have it treated is now paid for. He doesn't have to sell a lifetimes worth of tools (his livelihood) to pay for treatment....His out of pocket, $10K? I don't see how this isn't a steal?
    I dont see the point. Thats how insurance has always worked.

  7. #527
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    59,807

    re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by mmi View Post
    And yet you can't refute my claims.

    >>there were 142 million working Americans when Obama took office and there are 148 million now

    Employment fell to 138 million by the end of 2009, while the effects of the Great Recession, which resulted from tax cuts for the wealthy and an irresponsible deregulation of the financial sector, played through the labor market.

    Over the past five years, private-sector employment has increased by 12.6 million to 122 million, while public-sector jobs have decreased by about two million.

    >>there are 6.5 million part time employees now included in the employment number

    There are 27.5 million part-time workers. The 6.5 million figure is working part-time for economic reasons. There were more than eight million of those when Bush43 left office.

    Total part-time employment, which includes those who choose to work part-time, has been basically flat since a spike caused by the Great Recession. Other than that, it's pretty much followed the growth in the labor force for the past few decades, other than a spike in 1994. Dunno what that was about.

    Attachment 67186235

    Full-time employment under Obama has grown from 110.6 in Dec 2009 to 121.4 last month, up by 10.8 million.

    Attachment 67186236

    >>Stop making Gruber look brilliant

    You make a clump of dirt look brilliant.
    Yes, unemployment fell to 138 million in spite of the Obama stimulus that was for shovel ready jobs that wasn't supposed to let unemployment fall. You want to blame Bush for the Obama stimulus that didn't work? Now you want to give Obama credit for losing jobs for two years after the stimulus was passed and then creating jobs that only got us back to the level he inherited. That is liberal logic. Is it fact or opinion that Obama inherited 142 million working Americans?

    Please learn how to research BLS. if you are going to give Obama credit for the low unemployment rate then use the same chart used to report those numbers. It really is sad that people like you continue to buy rhetoric and support an incompetent. You are the one make a clump of dirt look brilliant

    What is it about liberalism that creates people like you who buy what they are told by the left and buy those opinions as fact?

  8. #528
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,425

    re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by jonny5 View Post
    The legislature is the check on SCOTUS. They can change the law and impeach judges. This of course assumes that SCOTUS uses the law to make rulings, and doesnt just make stuff up.
    evidently now they just make stuff up and it doesn't matter words don't matter anymore.

  9. #529
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    59,807

    re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by mmi View Post
    I did just that. I support the Act and I felt it was my patriotic duty to join in the effort.



    They all came back alive.

    >>25 million people were losing their coverage

    Part of that was what's called churn, a regular pattern. And, as was pointed out by another poster, the ACA cleaned out a lot of sham policies.

    >>See how that works?

    You should now.



    Indeed there is. They are pay-as-you-go. In that sense, it's foolish to even say they have unfunded liabilities.

    >>When will you hold your politicians accountable for spending the funds you contributed to SS?

    Money has been borrowed from the Trust Fund. It's paid back with interest.
    Wow, the indoctrination is quite extensive. Is it fact or opinion that SS and Medicare were put on budget and thus used for operating expenses of the United States? Where does the payback of SS and Medicare come from? Do you know what an unfunded liability is?

    When you put your money into SS and Medicare and it is spent on something else where does the money come from to return to you when you retire?

  10. #530
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    14,496

    re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    no I don't owe you anything. you are responsible for yourself. I don't work to pay for you I work to provide for my family. no people don't join socieities to take care of each other.
    no you are free to live in a place where everyone pays for everything for you. I hear cuba, china, north korea are nice this time of year.
    the government will take care of you at other peoples expense.
    Everyone is a self reliant maverick until something happens to them or their loved ones, then they take advantage of the benefits of living in a society.

    you need to read the article. obamacare and what is being proposed here is not the same. what they propse is actual competition in the market place obamacare is not competition in the market place. what the article proposes is allowing for people to buy insurance across state lines which is something republicans have proposed for years.
    There has NEVER been any restriction against selling insurance across state lines. First of all, any insurer could enter any state and sell state-compliant products. Furthermore, any state, and lots of them are GOP controlled, could always have disbanded its insurance commission and said, "Any insurance product legal in any of the 50 states can be sold here" and voila, republicans get their wish.

    Georgia did it, and no one came, no one inquired, and the problem is BCBS can't have a product X in Wisconsin, and then just offer that product X in Georgia and the rest of the states. The whole thing with health insurance is negotiating rates with the many local providers, and so in every state in which they sell product X they have to go into each local market and negotiate a slew of individual contracts with local providers, then they can set premiums, and start marketing. And they can do all that now and have always been able to do that. But the insurers who get the best rates from providers are BIG players - they can credibly threaten to withhold customers if providers don't come down on costs. Little players have no negotiating power - if they say, "we will withhold our 300 customers" providers say, great, don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way out... ! So if anyone wonders why almost every market has just ONE or just a few insurers competing, that's it, not that the law prevents lots of competitors coming in.

    I could keep going but the main attraction to "selling insurance across state lines" is it acts as a GOP talking point that they need because they have no other ideas, but it isn't at all clear that effectively neutering every state's insurance regulators would have much of an impact.

Posting Permissions

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