• 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.

Is Obamacare *really* that great?

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,576
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Campaign-related question: Is Obamacare *really* that great?

I ask because, it seems to me that this is pretty much President Obama's ONLY "accomplishment" that comes even close to actually being one. Yet, he keeps harping on the economy, how bad Romney would be, getting former President Clinton to say how big the mess was that even he couldn't have fixed it, and... precious little on what one would think would be his "crowing achievement" during his first term.

I'm in a swing state, so I see many ads from both sides. I see a great deal from the right warning me how much Obamacare will cost and how much of a boondoggle it will be. I see a few from the left touting and/or defending it, but not nearly as many.

If I were running, and I got something passed that I thought was a landmark piece of legislation on par with the Civil Rights Act, I'd be shouting it from the roof tops.
 
Campaign-related question: Is Obamacare *really* that great?

I ask because, it seems to me that this is pretty much President Obama's ONLY "accomplishment" that comes even close to actually being one. Yet, he keeps harping on the economy, how bad Romney would be, getting former President Clinton to say how big the mess was that even he couldn't have fixed it, and... precious little on what one would think would be his "crowing achievement" during his first term.

I'm in a swing state, so I see many ads from both sides. I see a great deal from the right warning me how much Obamacare will cost and how much of a boondoggle it will be. I see a few from the left touting and/or defending it, but not nearly as many.

If I were running, and I got something passed that I thought was a landmark piece of legislation on par with the Civil Rights Act, I'd be shouting it from the roof tops.

There's a whole lot of irony in this years election.

The reason I will probably vote for Gary Johnson is because the GOP nominee created RomneyCare.

Mitt Romney has already stated that he will keep key components of ObamaCare if he is elected.
 
I strongly disagree that this is his only accomplishment. Or just the only one the right will recognize. I was not going to vote this year because I am not a big Obama guy and I think Romney would destroy this country.

After the DNC meeting was over I watched Clinton's speech and he made some comments about what Obama has done over the last four years and although I wasn't concerned about all of them, a couple surprised me and so later I looked them up. Clinto was right on almost every one he stated in his speech and was totally right on the ones I was interested in.

Getting down to it. Politicians are politcians and they do what they do. Only once in a blue moon does one come along that pretty much does what he said he would do. FYI I am not talking about Obama
 
parts of it are good, but most of it is the heritage foundation's proposal from the early 1990s, and that design is flawed. it does little to control cost, and we're still stuck with the idiotic employer-specific health insurance system. this is the most inefficient delivery system imaginable. it also leaves in place the status quo of three levels of for-profit companies delivering an essential service with inelastic demand, which guarantees increasing costs. we would have been much better off studying what other first world nations are doing and then crafting a solution specifically for the US. perhaps someday we will. the PPACA is at best a baby step in the right direction.
 
he does not "shout it from the roofs" because it is more unpopular then popular......more people want it repealed then want it. So better to just stay away from it most of the time.
 
Campaign-related question: Is Obamacare *really* that great?

I ask because, it seems to me that this is pretty much President Obama's ONLY "accomplishment" that comes even close to actually being one. Yet, he keeps harping on the economy, how bad Romney would be, getting former President Clinton to say how big the mess was that even he couldn't have fixed it, and... precious little on what one would think would be his "crowing achievement" during his first term.

I'm in a swing state, so I see many ads from both sides. I see a great deal from the right warning me how much Obamacare will cost and how much of a boondoggle it will be. I see a few from the left touting and/or defending it, but not nearly as many.

If I were running, and I got something passed that I thought was a landmark piece of legislation on par with the Civil Rights Act, I'd be shouting it from the roof tops.

Millions of people who didn't have health insurance are going to be able to get it.

If you ask people about every major provision of the bill, they overwhelmingly approve of all of them except the mandate. As annoying as the mandate is, it's necessary to make the rest of it work.

The vast majority of the stories you hear from the right about it are just that - stories. Death panels, chip implants, government takeover of healthcare.... all bull****.
 
parts of it are good, but most of it is the heritage foundation's proposal from the early 1990s, and that design is flawed. it does little to control cost, and we're still stuck with the idiotic employer-specific health insurance system. this is the most inefficient delivery system imaginable. it also leaves in place the status quo of three levels of for-profit companies delivering an essential service with inelastic demand, which guarantees increasing costs. we would have been much better off studying what other first world nations are doing and then crafting a solution specifically for the US. perhaps someday we will. the PPACA is at best a baby step in the right direction.

I don't buy that it was patterned after the Heritage Foundation's ideas. By the guy who helped construct it:

My idea was hardly new. Heritage did not invent the individual mandate. But the version of the health insurance mandate Heritage and I supported in the 1990s had three critical features. First, it was not primarily intended to push people to obtain protection for their own good, but to protect others. Like auto damage liability insurance required in most states, our requirement focused on "catastrophic" costs — so hospitals and taxpayers would not have to foot the bill for the expensive illness or accident of someone who did not buy insurance.

Second, we sought to induce people to buy coverage primarily through the carrot of a generous health credit or voucher, financed in part by a fundamental reform of the tax treatment of health coverage, rather than by a stick.

And third, in the legislation we helped craft that ultimately became a preferred alternative to ClintonCare, the "mandate" was actually the loss of certain tax breaks for those not choosing to buy coverage, not a legal requirement.

The 2,000-page legislation that was passed is VERY different. Their idea was actually superior in my opinion. But we'll probably tweak this one into something acceptable. That "something acceptable," though, is never going to do a THING to control the cost of healthcare.
 
The problem is that the people who want ObamaCare only see what they want to see about it: FREE HEALTH CARE. YAY! They don't care where the money to pay for it comes from. It's not their problem. It's not their concern.

The reality of ObamaCare is the reality of any welfare program...the government lies to us about its cost. In 1998, the United States spent less than $300B on welfare in general. In 2011, it was $800 billion. Are there any controls in ObamaCare that place a ceiling on costs? Expect the costs to increase exponentially. The government doesn't know how to run ANYTHING efficiently. Never has...never will.

When Obama first touted ObamaCare, he promised...he swore...that it was only $800 billion dollars. $800 billion that the country does not have to spend. Every time the CBO looks at it, they jack the costs up. What was once $800 billion, is now $2.6 TRILLION. What's it gonna be next year? Three trillion? How about the year after? Five trillion?

So what are we going to actually get? Will the Messiah deliver that awesome health care that he promised? A lot of folks who have really examined it say "no." Actually, they say the quality of health care will actually decrease. Actual doctors say that ObamaCare will suck. In fact, a lot of doctors are now turning patients away, or even closing up shop because of the impending fear of ObamaCare.

What about Obama's "promise" that you'll be able to keep your current insurance? Nice try, Barry. ObamaCare is designed to put such a burden on existing insurance companies, that they're being forced to either up and quit some markets, or jack up their rates so high that employers have begun dropping coverage. They can't afford it. Thanks, Barry.

Oh...but....FREE HEALTH CARE!! YAYYY!!!!
 
Millions of people who didn't have health insurance are going to be able to get it.

If you ask people about every major provision of the bill, they overwhelmingly approve of all of them except the mandate. As annoying as the mandate is, it's necessary to make the rest of it work.

The vast majority of the stories you hear from the right about it are just that - stories. Death panels, chip implants, government takeover of healthcare.... all bull****.
But the mandate does virtually nothing to control costs. In fact, I think the mandate will increase costs, and it will be said increased costs that will bring down the whole thing. People will no longer be simply denied, they will be priced out and will "deny" themselves. Unfortunately, because our system works at a snail's pace, and because it is new, it will take years if not decades to get fixed.


he does not "shout it from the roofs" because it is more unpopular then popular......more people want it repealed then want it. So better to just stay away from it most of the time.
The most likely reason, but still seems odd to me.
 
But the mandate does virtually nothing to control costs. In fact, I think the mandate will increase costs
Yes, it WILL increase costs. Exponentially.

If you're forced by law to purchase something, there is nothing to prohibit the supplier from increasing the cost. After all....you're forced to purchase it, whether you want it or not.
 
Yes, it WILL increase costs. Exponentially.

If you're forced by law to purchase something, there is nothing to prohibit the supplier from increasing the cost. After all....you're forced to purchase it, whether you want it or not.

And even if it didn't increase costs, there's still the problem that if someone cannot afford something, passing a law that requires them to buy it will do nothing to allow them any more easily to afford it.

If ObamaCare was based on sound principles, then we could cure homelessness by passing a law that requires everyone to buy a house.
 
As for the OP, this is no where close to Civil Rights. Not even in the same hemisphere. The only reason people love it is because they assume the best about it since it has not gone into full effect. People are going to hate it. Poor people have no protection from private market co-pay/deduction changes that they still have to pay. This is not "free healthcare" by any stretch of the imagination.
 
Yes, it WILL increase costs. Exponentially.

If you're forced by law to purchase something, there is nothing to prohibit the supplier from increasing the cost. After all....you're forced to purchase it, whether you want it or not.

Y'all seem to keep forgetting that Obamacare has already been tried, under the brand name Romneycare. It did expand health coverage to virtually everyone. It did not increase costs relative to the rest of the country. It is popular. It is certainly an improvement over what we've had, though not exactly what I would have chosen.
 
Y'all seem to keep forgetting that Obamacare has already been tried, under the brand name Romneycare. It did expand health coverage to virtually everyone. It did not increase costs relative to the rest of the country. It is popular. It is certainly an improvement over what we've had, though not exactly what I would have chosen.

RomneyCare and ObamaCare are similar, but they are not the same.

RomneyCare v. ObamaCare Comparison Chart
 
The major components are the same. Functionally it is the same.

Not entirely. RomneyCare allows benefit limits and limited coverage on certain conditions. It also requires co-pays and the penalties are smaller for businesses.
 
Not entirely. RomneyCare allows benefit limits and limited coverage on certain conditions. It also requires co-pays and the penalties are smaller for businesses.

It has a mandate, it has lifetime limits, it eliminates preexisting conditions, it has exchanges ... these are the main components of Obamacare.
 
It has a mandate, it has lifetime limits, it eliminates preexisting conditions, it has exchanges ... these are the main components of Obamacare.

Of course, but like I said, it's similar, they are not carbon copies of each other.
 
Back
Top Bottom