• 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 repeal will cost $230 billion

So you think you should share in my healthcare costs? Thanks, send me a check. There is no logic in your stance. People that abuse their bodies make a personal choice to do that, why should the taxpayer fund their care. Want to cut healthcare costs, get illegal aliens under control. 600,000 was spent in my county alone for healthcare costs for illegals. That should be paid by the countries from which these illegals came. deduct it from foreign aid.

actually, why don't we allow PEOPLE to opt out, and insist they sign an agreement staing they will never be able to opt back in, like when their insurance company denies them coverage, or they want to change jobs and can't because of a pre existing condition, or they can't afford insurance. they don't pay extra, and they don't get any befefits. i'm all for that.
 
That was a nation wide trend at the time

That is what is going on in MA today. The trend is higher ER use and that is contrary to the promises made. Why anyone believes a bureaucrat's promises is beyond me.
 
Why are doctors and hospitals dropping Medicare? You cannot micromanage a private sector economy where people choose what profession to undertake. So with the infrastructure we have now why won't the MA situation be repeated nationwise?

Again, part of the piecemeal problem. Because we have a need not filled by medicare, something a universial payer would handle more effectively, we have to work on the overall system. You keep addressing existing problems, and blaming reform for them, eventhough they were here before reform. What we need is more reform, and not repeal.
 
actually, why don't we allow PEOPLE to opt out, and insist they sign an agreement staing they will never be able to opt back in, like when their insurance company denies them coverage, or they want to change jobs and can't because of a pre existing condition, or they can't afford insurance. they don't pay extra, and they don't get any befefits. i'm all for that.

Because the entire package proposed by Obama relies on 100% participation by all companies. Read the assumptions given the CBO and tell me how hundreds of companies opting out affect costs?
 
Why are doctors and hospitals dropping Medicare? You cannot micromanage a private sector economy where people choose what profession to undertake. So with the infrastructure we have now why won't the MA situation be repeated nationwise?


Actually I'm a bit involved in all this stuff and the reports you are hearing are a bit preliminary. I doubt most hospitals are going to drop medicare. They just don't know what is going on with all the changes. I know this because I was talking with my transplant financial adviser this morning.
 
he specifically DID mean insurance companies, as they are the companies that are affected by the limit in compensation deductions. not mcdonalds.

I thought he was talking about companies that received waivers for Obamacare.

Which brings up the question: if it's such a wonderful idea, why all the waivers?
 
I thought he was talking about companies that received waivers for Obamacare.

Which brings up the question: if it's such a wonderful idea, why all the waivers?

i don't know, i'll research.
 
Again, part of the piecemeal problem. Because we have a need not filled by medicare, something a universial payer would handle more effectively, we have to work on the overall system. You keep addressing existing problems, and blaming reform for them, eventhough they were here before reform. What we need is more reform, and not repeal.

Still waiting for you to show me a universal payer system that is effective, cost effective, and reduces ER usage? Only in the liberal world is more reform less costly when the reality shows that not to be the case. I am still waiting for you to tell us how Obamacare affects you?
 
actually, why don't we allow PEOPLE to opt out, and insist they sign an agreement staing they will never be able to opt back in, like when their insurance company denies them coverage, or they want to change jobs and can't because of a pre existing condition, or they can't afford insurance. they don't pay extra, and they don't get any befefits. i'm all for that.

IOW, punish people who don't play your game?

This is still The United States. Isn't it?
 
Actually I'm a bit involved in all this stuff and the reports you are hearing are a bit preliminary. I doubt most hospitals are going to drop medicare. They just don't know what is going on with all the changes. I know this because I was talking with my transplant financial adviser this morning.

45 doctor owned hospitals have stopped construction and hospitals all over the country are dropping Medicare.
 
What are you suppose to do when you think both the Democrat's plan and the GOP's plan are bat**** insane?

Is there an option C here?

Vote both A and B out and elect C. Did you notice what happened to the Dems in November?
 
Still waiting for you to show me a universal payer system that is effective, cost effective, and reduces ER usage? Only in the liberal world is more reform less costly when the reality shows that not to be the case. I am still waiting for you to tell us how Obamacare affects you?

Most of the world has some form of universal insuirer, and why all have some probelms, so does our system. If access is important, and I think it is, there is little doubt that a universal payer system provides better access for all. now, we can modify, make changes, address weaknesses, resopnd to new problems we find. But, the fact is our system limits access, hurts business, and costs a ton for less than the rest the rest of the world receives. that should be reason to open the discussions and to seek real reform.
 
IOW, punish people who don't play your game?

This is still The United States. Isn't it?

absolutely not. it would be their choice, that's all. how could any good conservative be against choice? seems to me you either like the plan or you don't. i like it, i would opt in, and gladly pay for it. you don't, you opt out. just don't put yourself in the position of needing help, that's all. easy, right? 'cause we are all responsible for our own situation, right? if you are against protecting people and ensuring adequate healthcare, then you can't be FOR it when you're the one in need. right?
 
Most of the world has some form of universal insuirer, and why all have some probelms, so does our system. If access is important, and I think it is, there is little doubt that a universal payer system provides better access for all. now, we can modify, make changes, address weaknesses, resopnd to new problems we find. But, the fact is our system limits access, hurts business, and costs a ton for less than the rest the rest of the world receives. that should be reason to open the discussions and to seek real reform.

Do Greece and Ireland have single payer systems?
 

That's the price America pays for voting in a bunch of incompetents, led by a tri-fecta of incompetents.

Better to repeal it, put the issue to bed for another 20-years, and in the mean time we can watch the great care the Eurosocialists are giving to their Baby Boomers. Their systems are bust now, and there is going to be a wave of Baby Boomers coming into retirement, and all the aches and pains of getting old. What then?

It all sounds so good, until the bill comes in for the inefficiencies and incompetence of government. Most of our 13,000,000,000,000 bit of trouble is mostly ineffciencies, incompetence and ignorance.

.
 
Last edited:
Vote both A and B out and elect C. Did you notice what happened to the Dems in November?

yeah, the same thing that usually happens in off year elections.
 
Most of the world has some form of universal insuirer, and why all have some probelms, so does our system. If access is important, and I think it is, there is little doubt that a universal payer system provides better access for all. now, we can modify, make changes, address weaknesses, resopnd to new problems we find. But, the fact is our system limits access, hurts business, and costs a ton for less than the rest the rest of the world receives. that should be reason to open the discussions and to seek real reform.

The problem with our system doesn't require a 2400 page bill that is filled with regulation and higher costs to employers. Real reform isn't what Obama did, he started the takeover process.
 
absolutely not. it would be their choice, that's all. how could any good conservative be against choice? seems to me you either like the plan or you don't. i like it, i would opt in, and gladly pay for it. you don't, you opt out. just don't put yourself in the position of needing help, that's all. easy, right? 'cause we are all responsible for our own situation, right? if you are against protecting people and ensuring adequate healthcare, then you can't be FOR it when you're the one in need. right?


So, basically, "if you opt and need help, **** you"?

I'll go along with that, as long as there's a stipulation to my opting out that guarantees that I won't have to spend a single dime to bailout this system when it goes belly up.
 
The problem with our system doesn't require a 2400 page bill that is filled with regulation and higher costs to employers. Real reform isn't what Obama did, he started the takeover process.

That's a matter of opinion to say the least. I'm sure you won't mind if a lot of people disagee. And I have linked for you in the past doctors who disagree with you, as well as many others.

And no, it isn't a take over process. No one is taking over anything.
 
yeah, the same thing that usually happens in off year elections.

It didn't happen for 50 years, prior to '94. It didn't happen for 12 years, prior to '07. So, it doesn't usually happen.

I know you like to think that the Dems didn't **** things up in just three short years, but I don't that's going to work for you.
 
So, basically, "if you opt and need help, **** you"?

I'll go along with that, as long as there's a stipulation to my opting out that guarantees that I won't have to spend a single dime to bailout this system when it goes belly up.

exactly. and the stipulation is fine as well. it's too bad this won't happen, i have a feeling the majority of people would opt in.
 
And no, it isn't a take over process. No one is taking over anything.

So you are claiming the government did, or did not, take over my choice to not purchase health insurance? Because I'm pretty sure it states that I will have to (when it goes active), purchase health insurance, under federal penalty.

Doesn't it also put similar requirements on private enterprises that sell insurance, or administer health care? Do you think it's appropriate to suggest that "Takeover" implies controls every single decision? A slave decided a lot of things on their own, but still a slave, no? (not equating it to slavery, just the first analogy I typed).

The idea that health care, and health insurance, should have significant government involved at all, is the argument libertarians pose.
 
Last edited:
It didn't happen for 50 years, prior to '94. It didn't happen for 12 years, prior to '07. So, it doesn't usually happen.

I know you like to think that the Dems didn't **** things up in just three short years, but I don't that's going to work for you.

you're right, my mistake. i didn't pay to much attention prior to 94.
 
Back
Top Bottom