• 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!

Health Care Bill has passed

You took the words out of my mouth, Captain. This really is just the first step in the right direction.

.....long time comin' but I'm so glad it's arrived!!


YAY!!! September 23rd I can put my uninsured son back on my medical coverage YIPPIE!!!!

:2wave:

Cool! Look at that. Already, one less person is uninsured. There are some people around here who might argue with you that that is not a fact. :doh

Congrats!
 
Yay! My broke family has to pay extra for our medical insurance because my dad is considered "self employed." Plus I get to pay for your medical costs because higher interests on my student loans (thanks Obama) get to pay for your health plans through this bill :D Thanks Mr. President, I always wanted the government to make my financially hurting family pay more for health insurance and have higher student loan interest rates.
 
You can stop making wafer-thin comments about a bill that we haven't seen the outcome of yet, then?

Maybe you should curb your enthusiastic support for that same unknown legislation then...hmmm?
 
Yay! My broke family has to pay extra for our medical insurance because my dad is considered "self employed." Plus I get to pay for your medical costs because higher interests on my student loans (thanks Obama) get to pay for your health plans through this bill :D Thanks Mr. President, I always wanted the government to make my financially hurting family pay more for health insurance and have higher student loan interest rates.

So on one hand you are against government subsidizies but the other for them?

How odd and inconsistant
 
Yay! My broke family has to pay extra for our medical insurance because my dad is considered "self employed." Plus I get to pay for your medical costs because higher interests on my student loans (thanks Obama) get to pay for your health plans through this bill :D Thanks Mr. President, I always wanted the government to make my financially hurting family pay more for health insurance and have higher student loan interest rates.

What!? This could be BAD for families?! Blasphemy, everyone is getting health care and rainbows and lollipops.
 
You can stop making wafer-thin comments about a bill that we haven't seen the outcome of yet, then?

NEWSFLASH:

Read post #992.

Voila... Outcome!
 
So on one hand you are against government subsidizies but the other for them?

How odd and inconsistant

when did I say that? The government took over the student loan business, it's no longer private. My loans come from the government, no longer from banks. And each issue is different. The student loans portion of the bill was thrown in last second. You see, not all stories from this bill are wonderful and happy, it's causing many like myself and my family to suffer and hurt further.

What!? This could be BAD for families?! Blasphemy, everyone is getting health care and rainbows and lollipops.

On page 1946 they removed the rainbows and lollipops for families. However, they did promise to find the magical unicorn on page 2096 that will shower us with sunbeams and sugarless chocolate. This will curve obesity and give us extra vitamin D. Obama is gonna make us healthy :D
 
Last edited:
when did I say that? The government took over the student loan business, it's no longer private. My loans come from the government, no longer from banks. And each issue is different. The student loans portion of the bill was thrown in last second. You see, not all stories from this bill are wonderful and happy, it's causing many like myself and my family to suffer and hurt further.

No that is not the case

The government took over government subsidized student loans

You can still go to a bank and get a private student loan.

The loan you were getting was subsidized by the government, it is just that the government let private banks administer them (for a nice profit to the banks)
 
when did I say that? The government took over the student loan business, it's no longer private. My loans come from the government, no longer from banks. And each issue is different. The student loans portion of the bill was thrown in last second. You see, not all stories from this bill are wonderful and happy, it's causing many like myself and my family to suffer and hurt further.
How dare you ruin their good feelings about themselves! Shame on you for crashing their utopian dream session with reality. {sarcasm off}
 
No that is not the case

The government took over government subsidized student loans

You can still go to a bank and get a private student loan.

The loan you were getting was subsidized by the government, it is just that the government let private banks administer them (for a nice profit to the banks)

And why did they take it over? To provide revenue for this bill, not to help out students in a time when higher education is strongly needed. They took it from the banks and raised the interest rate, how does that help anyone? Not only that, but it is further control of the banks and will possibly cause less people to go to college (because of higher rates and more to pay in loans after graduation).

How dare you ruin their good feelings about themselves! Shame on you for crashing their utopian dream session with reality. {sarcasm off}

But the good thing is that I can be a bum off my parents insurance plan until my late 20's!!! With all the sob stories out there I thought I'd post mine too :)
 
Last edited:
And why did they take it over? To provide revenue for this bill, not to help out students in a time when higher education is strongly needed. They took it from the banks and raised the interest rate, how does that help anyone? Not only that, but it is further control of the banks and will possibly cause less people to go to college (because of higher rates and more to pay in loans after graduation).

Right they took a government subsidized program from the banks

A program you were gladly taking part in. Ie you were taking part in a government subsidized program and found it to be a good thing

Which is why I found odd and inconsistant for you to complain about government subsidies (programs) while willingly taking part in one, when there are private options for you to take


And how does taking a program from the banks further control over the banks? It should actually lower the amount of control the government has on the banks, as they no longer have the carrot to dangle in front of them (they took the carrot away
 
Last edited:
But the good thing is that I can be a bum off my parents insurance plan until my late 20's!!! With all the sob stories out there I thought I'd post mine too :)
Shhhhhh. They only like that tactic when it allows them to take more stuff over, not when it proves they don't know what the **** they're doing.:rofl
 
Right they took a government subsidized program from the banks

A program you were gladly taking part in. Ie you were taking part in a government subsidized program and found it to be a good thing

Which is why I found odd and inconsistant for you to complain about government subsidies (programs) while willingly taking part in one, when there are private options for you to take


And how does taking a program from the banks further control over the banks? It should actually lower the amount of control the government has on the banks, as they no longer have the carrot to dangle in front of them (they took the carrot away

I was glad to take part in it because it saved me money. What they did proves that they could care less about higher education and saving students money in a time of economic crises. The government subsidies were supposed to encourage college enrollment and cut costs, instead they have increased them. What they did is a good thing for students back then, but now they have made it worse in a time that really can't handle it. All issues are different. Subsidizing student loans is a good thing for education (I mean, we do pay tons more for public schooling). Subsidizing healthcare like this is a bad thing. Each issue is different, and Obama's actions with this has screwed the students and the self employed. I gain nothing good from this bill, my loan will cost more and now my financially hurting family must pay more in a time of crisis. This bill is terrible, and it has affected me negatively two times so far with nothing good.
 
I was glad to take part in it because it saved me money. What they did proves that they could care less about higher education and saving students money in a time of economic crises. The government subsidies were supposed to encourage college enrollment and cut costs, instead they have increased them. What they did is a good thing for students back then, but now they have made it worse in a time that really can't handle it. All issues are different. Subsidizing student loans is a good thing for education (I mean, we do pay tons more for public schooling). Subsidizing healthcare like this is a bad thing. Each issue is different, and Obama's actions with this has screwed the students and the self employed. I gain nothing good from this bill, my loan will cost more and now my financially hurting family must pay more in a time of crisis. This bill is terrible, and it has affected me negatively two times so far with nothing good.

Right so you are against government subsidizies that do not benifit you, but are for them when they do,

I understand that totally
 
Moderator's Warning:
This thread has evoked more thread bans and more infractions than any thread in the history of DP. The posters that have already been eliminated, demonstrated that they were incapable of debating this topic with any civility or rationality. My suggestion to the rest of you is this. If you cannot debate this topic with civility and rationality, and feel that the only way you CAN is to either gloat, or whine, remove YOURSELF from the thread. You are doing NOTHING to help with your position, either pro- or con-. Take some responsibility for your own behaviors.
 
Right so you are against government subsidizies that do not benifit you, but are for them when they do,

I understand that totally

These government subsidies are wrong though, it would be better to sell insurance across state lines to lower costs. My student loan subsidy is far cheaper than that of health insurance. Each issue is different. I am for some subsides and against some others based on the issue. This doesn't make me a hypocrite. My argument is that it is unnecessary to make insurance cheaper through government spending if we let the market work it out via the competition of selling beyond state lines. This bill is bad for the majority of people, and personally for me.
 
These government subsidies are wrong though, it would be better to sell insurance across state lines to lower costs. My student loan subsidy is far cheaper than that of health insurance. Each issue is different. I am for some subsides and against some others based on the issue. This doesn't make me a hypocrite. My argument is that it is unnecessary to make insurance cheaper through government spending if we let the market work it out via the competition of selling beyond state lines. This bill is bad for the majority of people, and personally for me.

Then I would suggest arguing as such rather them making a stink about government subsidies being bad and that people using them are leeches on the hard working americans.

It is a far better arguement, in my opinion, certainly one that I would expect more people to respect (perhaps not agree).

That aside,

Regarding government subsidies in student loans, and in comparision to government subsidizies regarding health insurance.

I expect the government stepped in to provide subsidizies for student loans because loans in the past were not affordable for a good deal of students, and that it viewed having a higher number of people with higher education good for the individual and society. Given the high number of people who use government subsidizied student loans I expect they tend to agree. I would also expect that private lenders were not making student loans cheaper before the government stepped in to provide subsidized student loans. There are times when the market will not achieve goals that society may deem worthwhile (cheap student loans for instance, or affordable health insurance for all)

Could not a case be made that having a healthier individual should or will have health insurance now be better for the individual and for society.

As both an educated and healthy population tends to be a more productive society.
 
Last edited:
It's spread out over several posts over several threads. Here's what I remember.

Health care is NOT a right. It is an option. In my plan there are "Tiers" of health insurance. NO ONE is required to purchase health care insurance, and there are no fines if you do not.

Tier 1: Public Option: this option is offered by the government at prices competitive with private insurance, or at low cost for those who have problems with affordability based on eligibility. It would be paid for through an additional tax called the "HC" tax. Folks who do not want this option, can opt out, and will either get a tax rebate for the "HC" amount, or will simply not be required to pay it, which ever is more efficient.

Tier 2: Private Option: for those who opt out of the public option. Folks can pay for private insurance, or accept their company's insurance options.

Exemptions: Under no circumstances can any illegal alien receive any kind of health insurance, public, private, or Medicare/Medicaid.

Cost offset: This is the radical, yet cornestone of my plan. If you opt out of the public option, and do not purchase a private plan, if you get ill, you MUST pay out of pocket. Under NO circumstances will the government subsidize your treatment. NO EXCEPTIONS... catastrophic illness, accident, children... NO EXCEPTIONS. The options will be there and will be affordable. You chose not to take one of them, you lose. No physician or hospital will be under any obligation to treat anyone with no ability to pay. They MAY if they choose, but they can also "opt out".

Other parts of my plan:

1) Major Tort Reform.
2) The ability to purchase health care across state lines to further stimulate competition.
3) Elimination of insurance company driven utilization review, putting all treatment decisions in the hands of the provider.
4) No pre-existing condition limitation.
5) Adult children can remain on parental health insurance until 26.
6) Centralized, independent organization reviewing/evaluating all health care insurers (including the public option) with the power to fine or even shut down.

These are broad strokes, of course, but you get the gist. The plan above should both please liberals with a public option and making health care affordable to everyone, and to conservatives with creating a system that requires personal responsibility and competition. I'd be happy to answer questions about this plan, and am open to some REASONABLE additions. If you just want to throw hysterical partisan hackery at me, don't bother responding to this post. Both HarryGurellia and LaMidRighter have seen parts or all of this and, if I recall correctly, liked what they saw.

I know you said this probably 30 pages ago by now CC, but I wanted to tell you this sounds like a great plan. A few things need to be hammered out and then it would be probably one of the better HC bills that I have read.
 
I know you said this probably 30 pages ago by now CC, but I wanted to tell you this sounds like a great plan. A few things need to be hammered out and then it would be probably one of the better HC bills that I have read.

Thanks. I'm going to try to answer some questions that a few folks asked me about it, later.
 
Not sure. It is an affliction that results in pre-existing condition.

I don't like the idea of extending insurance or not based on behavior.

Why not. It is personal responsibility. If you dont want to take care of yourself why should it be up to others to pay for your lazy butt. So do you think that we shouldnt decide if people get loans or not based on behavior as well. Nevermind that the guy is in debt to his eyeballs and always makes the min payment and spends everydime he makes. He should get the same loan as the guy who saves and is responsible. Why shoudnt the dumbass who droped out of high school get the same paying job as the lady who spent all that time and effort going to med school. I mean it is only fair right. I dont see the difference. If more people would take care of themselves and qute looking for a hand out and take responsibility for themselves this country wouldnt be in the mess it is in right now.
 
It's spread out over several posts over several threads. Here's what I remember....
As we have discussed before, this is one of the things you and I agree on.

This is a perfectly reasonable plan that will never win support from those that are supposedly most concerned with the health care issue simply because it doesnt give the government more power.
 
If an uninsured motorist hit's your car, your insurance covers it and your rates go up.

No true. Most states ban auto insurance rates from rising due to an uninsured or under insured claim.

Another difference... uninsured insurance coverage is not mandatory. You can take it or leave it.

If an uninsured person has to go to the hospital, we have to treat them anyways, and our rates go up.

And now, our rates will go up anyway. What's the difference???
 
No true. Most states ban auto insurance rates from rising due to an uninsured or under insured claim.

Per individual policy. However, the added cost still has a price effect on the respective risk pool.

Another difference... uninsured insurance coverage is not mandatory. You can take it or leave it.

But you cannot legally drive a vehicle in the US without liability coverage. You can think of this as similar to major medical coverage.

And now, our rates will go up anyway. What's the difference???

Who's? Not mine.
 
Per individual policy. However, the added cost still has a price effect on the respective risk pool.

It's a state by state law and has nothing to do with individual policies.

But you cannot legally drive a vehicle in the US without liability coverage. You can think of this as similar to major medical coverage.

I never said otherwise.

Auto liability insurance protects others from your negligence. Health insurance protects only the person insured.

Who's? Not mine.

You actually think that people with pre-existing conditions can be added, along with "kids" under 26 without a corresponding rate increase.

Those are just two of the many causes of insurance rate increases that will come out of this bill. Even the CBO, using the faulty assumptions from Pelosi, said there would be rate increases.
 
Back
Top Bottom