• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

FLOTUS: Obamacare keeps women from dying of cancer, but GOP would repeal it [W:80]

Fishstyx said:
You keep saying that rather matter of factly. Do you have anything to support it? Is there some magical way to bridge the gap on doctor/specialist shortage which significantly worsen by adding 30 mil people to the demand? Hope you have something other than...."because I say so."

There is a ton of write ups out there, from all types of sources including left leaning ones that have raised the issue of adding this much more demand to an already stressed supply.
Click to expand...

Okay, so how about posting some of those writeups that support your claim that people will die because of a doctor shortage. You claim there are a ton of them, so it should be easy.

The bottom line is that it's a problem, but one that can be addressed, and one that is being addressed already: http://www.forbes.com/sites/bruceja...ical-schools-open-to-address-doctor-shortage/
 
Last edited:
Fruityfact said:
You can't be serious?
Click to expand...

Why, werent you serious when you said I implied that? Or was that a strawman? Let me put it another way. If someone cant afford care, I should not be forced to pay for it. What happens to them beyond that, I dont care. You can treat me the same way.
 
jonny5 said:
Why, werent you serious when you said I implied that? Or was that a strawman? Let me put it another way. If someone cant afford care, I should not be forced to pay for it. What happens to them beyond that, I dont care. You can treat me the same way.
Click to expand...

But that's the point, YOU ARE PAYING FOR IT!!!
 
jonny5 said:
Why, werent you serious when you said I implied that? Or was that a strawman? Let me put it another way. If someone cant afford care, I should not be forced to pay for it. What happens to them beyond that, I dont care. You can treat me the same way.
Click to expand...

What a mentality...smh
 
jonny5 said:
Why, werent you serious when you said I implied that? Or was that a strawman? Let me put it another way. If someone cant afford care, I should not be forced to pay for it. What happens to them beyond that, I dont care. You can treat me the same way.
Click to expand...

And that attitude right there? Is why we'll never have a Libertarian president.
 
NateNY3 said:
Is she lying about something?
Click to expand...

Depends on what you consider lying... Did she make a flat out false statement, no... Did she make a baseless generalization which in no way accurately pertains to the positions of either campaigns or their policies... Yes... In my book, that type of baseless accusation is a lie...

As a Governor, Mitt Romney created and signed the first successful universal healthcare legislation in the country that did not raise spending by the government or create a large overarching beaurocracy to manage it... This plan was the first to allow people to keep their existing health insurance when switching or losing jobs... And it allowed people who couldn't afford health insurance to pay into a subsidized health insurance pool in accordance with their income...

To suggest that Mitt Romney doesn't care about providing health insurance to people who can't afford it is as inaccurate a statement as there is...

A disagreement about how to carry out a policy does not equate to not agreeing with the policy... She's making it seem Mitt Romney and the Republicans in Congress would rather people die... However, that's not what they stand for... They just don't agree that a massive increase in federal spending, and boards overseeing people's healthcare, with price controls, and a single payer system is the wisest course for correcting the problems with the affordability of healthcare...

For example, I would love for Michelle Obama go get to go on vacation trips around the Globe... but I don't want her wasting taxpayer money to do so... Mitt Romney and the Republicans in Congress aren't in favor of her doing that, but Obama has enjoyed doing it alongside her...

It's just about a more responsible way to manage taxpayer finances...
 
IndepCentristMA said:
Depends on what you consider lying... Did she make a flat out false statement, no... Did she make a baseless generalization which in no way accurately pertains to the positions of either campaigns or their policies... Yes... In my book, that type of baseless accusation is a lie...

As a Governor, Mitt Romney created and signed the first successful universal healthcare legislation in the country that did not raise spending by the government or create a large overarching beaurocracy to manage it... This plan was the first to allow people to keep their existing health insurance when switching or losing jobs... And it allowed people who couldn't afford health insurance to pay into a subsidized health insurance pool in accordance with their income...

To suggest that Mitt Romney doesn't care about providing health insurance to people who can't afford it is as inaccurate a statement as there is...

A disagreement about how to carry out a policy does not equate to not agreeing with the policy... She's making it seem Mitt Romney and the Republicans in Congress would rather people die... However, that's not what they stand for... They just don't agree that a massive increase in federal spending, and boards overseeing people's healthcare, with price controls, and a single payer system is the wisest course for correcting the problems with the affordability of healthcare...

For example, I would love for Michelle Obama go get to go on vacation trips around the Globe... but I don't want her wasting taxpayer money to do so... Mitt Romney and the Republicans in Congress aren't in favor of her doing that, but Obama has enjoyed doing it alongside her...

It's just about a more responsible way to manage taxpayer finances...
Click to expand...

I would tend to agree with this IF they have a backup plan, but they don't...they want to repeal Obamacare but not replace it with anything...
 
Mrs. Obama's premise is that the ObamaCare scam will make it easier for more people to afford health coverage, and that by so doing, more people will be prevented from dying of cancer.

I think that by now, the root of the premise can clearly be seen as false. In spite of all the promises, there is nothing in ObamaCare that even begins to address the reasons why health care is becoming so expensive and unaffordable for so many people; and nothing that can plausibly be expected to reduce the costs or make it more affordable. In fact, the additional layers of bureaucracy and regulation cannot possibly have any effect but the opposite, to make it even more expensive, and to put it beyond the reach of even more Americans.

If anything, more people will die from cancer, and from other preventable causes, as a result of ObamaCare, than would have without it.
 
NateNY3 said:
I would tend to agree with this IF they have a backup plan, but they don't...they want to repeal Obamacare but not replace it with anything...
Click to expand...

What you may not understand is that ObamaCare isn't a nationalized healthcare plan... It's a federal oversite board of several programs which overlap at the state level...

The plan that Romney has been dealing with is to give the money straight to the states to craft their own healthcare plans, many of which will mirror his in MA, but not every state can afford to do what Mitt did in MA... not having enough workers with insurance through work, or hospitals, or large insurance companies who can afford to lose in the pools... So they would craft other policies which won't bankrupt them...

So by giving money to the states to run their healthcare plans, you lose the loss of funds at the federal level... that beaurocratic overstructure that the Democrats in MA added to CommonwealthCare, and that Democrats in Washington added to ObamaCare make it so you're spending less money directly to healthcare, and more money on government administrators...

That's a preferable plan in my opinion...
 
OpportunityCost said:
Scroll down a few posts and you see AdamT making the SAME argument, that getting rid of Obama care will mean people will lose their health coverage and die. So whatever, your willful blindness is not a substitute for non-partisanship.
Click to expand...

If you want to use another poster's post, quote the post in question, and I doubt he made "the SAME argument", so my guess is it's another lie from you. No where did I see him claim that "Obamacare will prevent them from dying of cancer and the GOP wants to repeal that, implying they are on the hook for the deaths."

Attacking me won't cover up the fact that you lie.
 
Fruityfact said:
You can't be serious?
Click to expand...

The Republicans are the ones not being serious about their claims. If they want personal responsibility and a free market system, let people die. Either you have money to pay or you go without. Repeal the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, allow hospitals to refuse patients at emergency rooms as they see fit. Hospitals should decide for themselves if they want to risk looking after patients who might not be able to pay them. Do that and most Americans will see "personal responsibility" and the "free market" in healthcare as the bull**** it is.
 
Last edited:
IndepCentristMA said:
Depends on what you consider lying... Did she make a flat out false statement, no... Did she make a baseless generalization which in no way accurately pertains to the positions of either campaigns or their policies... Yes... In my book, that type of baseless accusation is a lie...

As a Governor, Mitt Romney created and signed the first successful universal healthcare legislation in the country that did not raise spending by the government or create a large overarching beaurocracy to manage it... This plan was the first to allow people to keep their existing health insurance when switching or losing jobs... And it allowed people who couldn't afford health insurance to pay into a subsidized health insurance pool in accordance with their income...

To suggest that Mitt Romney doesn't care about providing health insurance to people who can't afford it is as inaccurate a statement as there is...

A disagreement about how to carry out a policy does not equate to not agreeing with the policy... She's making it seem Mitt Romney and the Republicans in Congress would rather people die... However, that's not what they stand for... They just don't agree that a massive increase in federal spending, and boards overseeing people's healthcare, with price controls, and a single payer system is the wisest course for correcting the problems with the affordability of healthcare...

For example, I would love for Michelle Obama go get to go on vacation trips around the Globe... but I don't want her wasting taxpayer money to do so... Mitt Romney and the Republicans in Congress aren't in favor of her doing that, but Obama has enjoyed doing it alongside her...

It's just about a more responsible way to manage taxpayer finances...
Click to expand...



Romney the Candidate seems to espouse different beliefs from Romney the Governor, who's going to emerge after the election? No one knows. What we know is that Obamacare is base off of Romneycare and Romney wants to repeal the individual mandate that he knew was what paid for Romneycare. He has never said how he would pay for the things he want to keep of Obamacare without the individual mandate. Passing it to States won't mean that more people will be covered, many states are prepared to turn away Federal money rather than cover more people. The Republicans has no better record on "responsible spending" than the Democrats, anyone who believe they will rein in the deficit is just living a pipe dream.
 
nonpareil said:
The Republicans are the ones not being serious about their claims. If they want personal responsibility and a free market system, let people die. Either you have money to pay or you go without. Repeal the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, allow hospitals to refuse patients at emergency rooms as they see fit. Hospitals should decide for themselves if they want to risk looking after patients who might not be able to pay them. Do that and most Americans will see "personal responsibility" and the "free market" in healthcare as the bull**** it is.
Click to expand...

Thats not the Republican position though. They are not proposing to end social programs, but to control costs through competition. They are not proposing to turn anyone away.
 
jonny5 said:
Thats not the Republican position though. They are not proposing to end social programs, but to control costs through competition. They are not proposing to turn anyone away.
Click to expand...

And that's why I said they are not serious about their claims about "personal responsibility" and "free market", they just use those terms as political rhetorics, they do not actually believe in them, which is why those terms as used by them with regards to healthcare are bull****. "Control costs through competition" is another bull**** they like to use. There's no evidence that transferring people from government provided healthcare to insurance companies and private hospitals control costs, there's plenty of evidence that single provider healthcare and proper guidelines as to how care is provided have resulted in lower costs in other countries.
 
Last edited:
nonpareil said:
And that's why I said they are not serious about their claims about "personal responsibility" and "free market", they just use those terms as political rhetorics, they do not actually believe in them, which is why those terms as used by them with regards to healthcare are bull****. "Control costs through competition" is another bull**** they like to use. There's no evidence that transferring people from government provided healthcare to insurance companies and private hospitals control costs, there's plenty of evidence that single provider healthcare and proper guidelines as to how care is provided have resulted in lower costs in other countries.
Click to expand...

It controls costs for the govt. Youre also not considering quality of care vs cost of care. Its easy to give everyone the lowest possible care for cheap. Thats what free gets you. But hey, Im basically agreeing with you. Republicans are just as bad as democrats.
 
nonpareil said:
Romney the Candidate seems to espouse different beliefs from Romney the Governor, who's going to emerge after the election? No one knows.
Click to expand...

Romney is not espousing different beliefs... He did what he did as Governor, and felt many other Governors could use his plan in their states, but that it wouldn't make sense in every state, and feels the states should be given the freedom to craft the plans which they feel are best suited for the needs of their states... That's the same position he's had... It hasn't changed, but how people word it has changed, going off of their political bias in the matter...

Some states are going bankrupt, and don't have the available pool coverages to cut the costs of treatment of the uninsured... Romney worked with the local insurance companies to make sure those pools were in place before the plan would take effect... Romney's plan wouldn't work in many of those states... and ObamaCare did not set up any of the pool coverages... they just simply said "There will be connectors"... will there? You can't craft policy like that... In some areas those there will be companies actively seeking those people... in other areas the connector won't be able to put you in a pool, and you will be single payer...

However, if you're worried about which will emerge... think candidate needs to say what he has to in order to get elected... position holder has to do what they need to do in order to effectively manage their organization... More than likely who emerges is the same effective leader, that he has been, as Governor, CEO and President of the Salt Lake City Olympics and Organizing Committee, and CEO of Bain Capital and Bain Investment...

nonpareil said:
What we know is that Obamacare is base off of Romneycare and Romney wants to repeal the individual mandate that he knew was what paid for Romneycare. He has never said how he would pay for the things he want to keep of Obamacare without the individual mandate.
Click to expand...

First off, ObamaCare was not based off of RomneyCare... Romney, the Heritage Foundation, local healthcare businesses, and the state legislators were all brought together to craft the plan that was passed in MA... NONE of them were contacted by the Obama administration for advice on what the healthcare plan should look like... Deval Patrick, Obama's friend told him about things that were used in the plan... But, Deval Patrick didn't come into office until after the Democrats had mutated what Romney signed into an entirely different plan, which ended up increasing many costs... ObamaCare looks nothing like what we have here in MA....

That's not what Romney wants to repeal it as... it's just a trigger word, so you avoid using or contradicting the trigger word that you know will set people off... What Romney wants to repeal ObamaCare for, is because it has added significant spending to an already overspent budget...

Plus, he's said what he'd remove... The largess of government bureaucracy that it created... which takes a large amount to fund... It's one of the same things he fought hard against as Governor... yet the Democrats added it back into CommonwealthCare and it increased the costs of it... He wants to take money out of the several approval boards which Democrats have put in place to oversee the running of it... It's completely unecessary governmental parenting, and it adds significantly to the costs of several legislative pieces in addition to healthcare...


nonpareil said:
Passing it to States won't mean that more people will be covered, many states are prepared to turn away Federal money rather than cover more people.
Click to expand...

Those people refused the money out of political spite, because Obama, Reid, Pelosi, and co. were shoving it down everyone's throats, without consulting them, or even considering how they would be effected by it...

Turning it to the states eliminates a huge amount that is wasted on federal administrators, rather than on covering healthcare... If the money is targeted for healthcare, spending it on administrators makes no sense, and only further increases the overall cost of healthcare in this country...

nonpareil said:
The Republicans has no better record on "responsible spending" than the Democrats, anyone who believe they will rein in the deficit is just living a pipe dream.
Click to expand...

You're not contradicting anything that Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have not said already... They've said BOTH SIDES have contributed to the overspending and that it needs to stop...

However, none of these Republicans or Democrats in the Senate that get spoken of can be said to have nearly the fiscal responsibility that Mitt Romney has proven for 28 years, balancing budgets for multiple large organizations, in business, government, and with non-governmental agencies...

So to suggest that Mitt Romney is going to throw out his entire life's pattern and suddenly turn into a big spending overbudget liberal is absurd...

We KNOW (with 28 yrs of proof) what Mitt Romney does as a leader... and that's create growth, foster responsibility, and restore sanity to otherwise bleak fiscal outlooks...
 
jonny5 said:
It controls costs for the govt.
Click to expand...

It doesn't. Government still pays private insurance for medicare advantage, but they pay more than for people who use government services.


Youre also not considering quality of care vs cost of care. Its easy to give everyone the lowest possible care for cheap. Thats what free gets you. But hey, Im basically agreeing with you. Republicans are just as bad as democrats.
Click to expand...

You don't know what I'm considering or not. Countries with national healthcare do not give "the lowest possible care for cheap", they ration it base on needs, rather than ability to pay, that's quality vs quantity. In healthcare, more does not always mean better. Doing more unnecessary tests do not deliver better healthcare. Their quality can seen from the health of their citizens and the satisfaction they show for their health services. Very few people in the UK, France or most of Western Europe would exchange their health services for the US's system.

The Republicans are worse than the Democrats when it comes to healthcare, the Democrats acknowledge the moral imperative to look after people who need healthcare, and seek to create a framework that does that, the Republicans refuse to acknowledge this while their legislative actions endorse this moral imperative, and at the same time screaming about high healthcare costs that is a result of these legislative actions.
 
nonpareil said:
If you want to use another poster's post, quote the post in question, and I doubt he made "the SAME argument", so my guess is it's another lie from you. No where did I see him claim that "Obamacare will prevent them from dying of cancer and the GOP wants to repeal that, implying they are on the hook for the deaths."

Attacking me won't cover up the fact that you lie.
Click to expand...

Adam T:
Yep, that's pretty much what it's saying, and of course it is TRUE.
Click to expand...

Stop calling me a lair, I dont appreciate being smeared. You werent even willing to do enough follow up to check on his post to SEE if he said what I claimed, you just brought out the liar charge. That seems like a pretty slimy tactic to be using.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Adam T: Stop calling me a lair, I dont appreciate being smeared. You werent even willing to do enough follow up to check on his post to SEE if he said what I claimed, you just brought out the liar charge. That seems like a pretty slimy tactic to be using.
Click to expand...

That's his poor tactic lately... Call everyone that opposing Obama a Republican, and say all Republicans are liars, just like Mitt Romney... despite the fact that we can back up what we say with facts... and he can only distort, distract, misstate, and do anything but address the facts pertaining to the failings of this current president, and what he is responsible for...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom