• 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!

Ted Cruz going on Obamacare

SenorXm/Sirius said:
Good morning. And no problem.

What pisses me off is even before ACA what we had socialism. Someone goes to the ER without HI, and can't pay, so who pays for them? The tax payers and the people with HI, thats who. So they need to put something in place so everyone is covered. Yes, that is socialism, but that's what we got now anyway. The difference is what we have now is a complete, helter skelter mess. The person w/o HI gets a heart procedure and is charged $20,000. The person with HI for the same procedure is charged $50,000. They need to put something in place that manages costs fairly. And that should stabilize costs, maybe.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more.
 
Dovkan said:
The 'punishment' is minimal and has exemptions.
Click to expand...

"minimal" is relative.... but it's still a punishment for not living up to what you government had ordered you to do.

equivocate all you like, but there's no getting around the basic fact that your federal government has ordered you to purchase a commercial product.
 
When Democrats say that taxes are too low, do any of our liberal friends start threads about them when they pay their taxes according to the current tax law?

When Democrats say the "tax loopholes" have to be closed, do any of our liberal friends call them hypocrites for using those "loopholes" when they file and pay their taxes?

When Obama tells us we have to change our lifestyles to reverse global warning and save the planet, our liberal friends make excuses for him when he and his wife take separate planes to travel to the same destination on the same day.



It's nothing but faux outrage when those same liberals claim hypocrisy when Cruz follows a law that he doesn't like
 
Thrilla said:
"minimal" is relative.... but it's still a punishment for not living up to what you government had ordered you to do.

equivocate all you like, but there's no getting around the basic fact that your federal government has ordered you to purchase a commercial product.
Click to expand...

No one is being ordered to do anything, that is like saying the government is forcing us to follow the speed limit, or something as preposterous as that.
 
Dovkan said:
No one is being ordered to do anything, that is like saying the government is forcing us to follow the speed limit, or something as preposterous as that.
Click to expand...

a mandate is an official order.... in this particular case, given by the federal government.

force includes coercion or compulsion.... coercion and compulsion are part and parcel of the individual mandate.

sorry man, your position is untenable.... rethink it.
 
Dovkan said:
No one is being ordered to do anything, that is like saying the government is forcing us to follow the speed limit, or something as preposterous as that.
Click to expand...
And if a politician vows to eliminate the speed limit he is not a hypocrite if he continues to follow the speed limit law while it is in effect
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
COBRA and private HI has nothing to do with ACA. Both been around long before ACA. You seem to be saying that because all HI policies now must cover pre-existing conditions they are all ACA policies? Nope.
Click to expand...

Because I've never dealt with cobra, how long would it lasts? I see some saying 36 months, other 18. Also, is he elligible since his wife was not terminated, but quit, her job?

As to the private plans, yes,..those are still impacted by the ACC. Whether it's a private plan or state exchange, Cruz is still being "impacted" and "effected" and given "benefits" of the ACA. If the mere notion of gaining a benefit compared to no insurance from ACA somehow makes him a hypocrite, than thst applies to him purchasing a private plan as well
 
Thrilla said:
a mandate is an official order.... in this particular case, given by the federal government.

force includes coercion or compulsion.... coercion and compulsion are part and parcel of the individual mandate.

sorry man, your position is untenable.... rethink it.
Click to expand...

I am curious. The mandate is for people to have insurance of a certain quality. Is there actually any mandate that states you must get it from an exchange or a particular place?

Could he have gotten insurance privately?
 
year2late said:
I am curious. The mandate is for people to have insurance of a certain quality. Is there actually any mandate that states you must get it from an exchange or a particular place?

Could he have gotten insurance privately?
Click to expand...

the mandate only states you have to have a policy that qualifies.... it doesn't force anyone to get that policy from anywhere.

yes, he can get a private insurance policy.. .but he would pay 100% of the premiums for that policy.. he would have to forgo his employer contribution ( which is 75%).

the same is true for any other employee in the country.. they don't have to go through their employer to get health insurance... they are free to purchase their own plan and pay 100% of the cost.
I doubt anyone here will fault any other employee on the planet for taking the employer provided health insurance benefits if it's available to them... Cruz is obviously special in this regard.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
60% of all personal bankruptcies are caused by medical expenses and costs. So no, there really isn't a lot of regulations to solve those difficulties. Unless of course you are counting going bankrupt as one of those options.
Click to expand...

That only means that the regulation we have allows this outcome. It says nothing about the fact that there are many ways to regulate the thing. It doesn't even say that the way it has been is inefficient.
 
Zyphlin said:
If the mere notion of gaining a benefit compared to no insurance from ACA somehow makes him a hypocrite, than thst applies to him purchasing a private plan as well
Click to expand...

After thinking about it, I've come to the conclusion that it's not so much hypocrisy as it is dishonesty

For some time, Cruz and the right have been loudly whining about how terrible it is that millions of americans have lost their plan and been "forced" to buy coverage in an exchange. Now that he has lost his plan, Cruz (whose wealth and position gives him as more options than most) has decided to buy a plan on the exchange because it the best option available to him

Why is it that when others choose the best option, they are being "forced" to do that, but when Cruz makes such a choice, he's doing the smart thing?

IOW, his choice illuminates the fact that his rhetoric about being "forced" to buy on the exchange is nothing but a lie. The truth is, for millions of americans, the exchange is best available option because of the benefits it provides. The people buying coverage there are not victims of coercion; They are recipients of a valuable benefit.
 
sangha said:
After thinking about it, I've come to the conclusion that it's not so much hypocrisy as it is dishonesty

For some time, Cruz and the right have been loudly whining about how terrible it is that millions of americans have lost their plan and been "forced" to buy coverage in an exchange. Now that he has lost his plan, Cruz (whose wealth and position gives him as more options than most) has decided to buy a plan on the exchange because it the best option available to him

Why is it that when others choose the best option, they are being "forced" to do that, but when Cruz makes such a choice, he's doing the smart thing?

IOW, his choice illuminates the fact that his rhetoric about being "forced" to buy on the exchange is nothing but a lie. The truth is, for millions of americans, the exchange is best available option because of the benefits it provides. The people buying coverage there are not victims of coercion; They are recipients of a valuable benefit.
Click to expand...
you're building a strawman here.
nobody has argued it's not the best option for other people to take advantage of..... nobody has argued they are not doing the smart thing.
most of the people buying into the exchanges are doing the only thing they can do.. and are mandated to do.... and nobody here is taking any of them to task over doing as much.

but the existence of the individual mandate pretty much renders your argument of " they're not being forced/coerced" to be incorrect on the merits.
 
Thrilla said:
"minimal" is relative.... but it's still a punishment for not living up to what you government had ordered you to do.

equivocate all you like, but there's no getting around the basic fact that your federal government has ordered you to purchase a commercial product.
Click to expand...

But if the government doesn't "order" you to purchase health insurance, it's simply a license to freeload, and those who choose to go without health insurance are offloading their catastrophic health care policy onto you and me. If baffles me that conservatives now recognize this right to freeload as something sacred. They used to know better, but I guess since the ACA has a mandate, and the ACA is the devil ===> mandates violate some fundamental freedom to freeload off those with insurance.

And FWIW, it's in part a rhetorical distinction between a mandate to buy something and a fine if you don't, but I actually see the distinction as fairly significant. You don't in fact have to purchase insurance, but if you want to freeload, society has every 'right' and I'd argue a fiscal obligation to put a price on freeloading. If a freeloading uninsured person gets into a bad car wreck, the rest of us will pick up his $100,000 hospital bill. If he wants the 'right' to gamble, keep the premium savings, and shift his losses/costs to us if he loses his bet that he'll stay healthy, we have a 'right' to make him pay for that privilege - put a cost on that bet.

As an aside, the real problem with the mandate, IMO, is that it does require a fairly comprehensive policy. I think that's the right choice, but recognize that there is a good argument against comprehensive insurance in favor of catastrophic plans and MSAs or something. So, OK, if a conservative wants to propose that, and with it some way for the poor to afford the copayments up to the floor of the catastrophic plan, that would be fine. But for anything to actually work, we're going to have to cover everyone or mandate coverage.
 
Thrilla said:
you're building a strawman here.
nobody has argued it's not the best option for other people to take advantage of..... nobody has argued they are not doing the smart thing.
most of the people buying into the exchanges are doing the only thing they can do.. and are mandated to do.... and nobody here is taking any of them to task over doing as much.

but the existence of the individual mandate pretty much renders your argument of " they're not being forced/coerced" to be incorrect on the merits.
Click to expand...

No one is mandated to buy a plan on an exchange so they are not being forced or coerced to do so.
 
Zyphlin said:
Because I've never dealt with cobra, how long would it lasts? I see some saying 36 months, other 18. Also, is he elligible since his wife was not terminated, but quit, her job?

As to the private plans, yes,..those are still impacted by the ACC. Whether it's a private plan or state exchange, Cruz is still being "impacted" and "effected" and given "benefits" of the ACA. If the mere notion of gaining a benefit compared to no insurance from ACA somehow makes him a hypocrite, than thst applies to him purchasing a private plan as well
Click to expand...

COBRA is up to 3 years. Obviously there are conditions, etc. But it's usually 18-36 months.

IIRC Cruz himself said that he is now signing up for ACA, which means before when he was under his wife's plan he wasn't in ACA. So to stay out of ACA all he had to do was stay in her policy via COBRA. The political benefit would have been huge for him.

He's a smart guy, and I'm sure he has smart people around him. He had other options besides ACA, I have no idea why he went into ACA.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
COBRA is up to 3 years. Obviously there are conditions, etc. But it's usually 18-36 months.

IIRC Cruz himself said that he is now signing up for ACA, which means before when he was under his wife's plan he wasn't in ACA. So to stay out of ACA all he had to do was stay in her policy via COBRA. The political benefit would have been huge for him.

He's a smart guy, and I'm sure he has smart people around him. He had other options besides ACA, I have no idea why he went into ACA.
Click to expand...

We'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's to point out all the horrors of a "government plan." He's coming off a solid gold plan at GS (I read an unconfirmed account that it costs about $50,000/year), so I imagine his coverage will drop significantly, and if it does, we'll hear about it, and if it doesn't then no harm done. But I'm skeptical and don't think much of Cruz, so admittedly biased.
 
Thrilla said:
a mandate is an official order.... in this particular case, given by the federal government.

force includes coercion or compulsion.... coercion and compulsion are part and parcel of the individual mandate.

sorry man, your position is untenable.... rethink it.
Click to expand...

No, it's not, because it makes more sense when you realize he doesn't have to get on obamacare, and citizens aren't forced to either.
 
Dovkan said:
No, it's not, because it makes more sense when you realize he doesn't have to get on obamacare, and citizens aren't forced to either.
Click to expand...

:roll: People have been forced to buy healthcare or pay a fine. That's a fact.
 
Henrin said:
:roll: People have been forced to buy healthcare or pay a fine. That's a fact.
Click to expand...

True, and there is a right to freeload, so the mandate is an impermissible infringement on our freedom and liberty!!
 
JasperL said:
True, and there is a right to freeload, so the mandate is an impermissible infringement on our freedom and liberty!!
Click to expand...

You have a right to decide if you will buy a good or service or not. If you decide to never buy insurance that is your right and I have no more right than anyone else to force you to buy it.
 
Henrin said:
You have a right to decide if you will buy a good or service or not. If you decide to never buy insurance that is your right and I have no more right than anyone else to force you to buy it.
Click to expand...

We can do this argument a number of ways, but speaking of "rights" is fine. But first of all, the relevant market isn't the "insurance" market but the health care market, and no one really CAN irrevocably opt out of the healthcare market.

Second, the problem is the violation of "rights" begins with the uninsured person. Whether he wants to or not, he simply does impose an obligation on the rest of us to treat him if he gets very sick or in a bad accident, and we haven't agreed to assume his burden, and aren't compensated for assuming this catastrophic healthcare risk on his behalf. The mandate is just a partial effort to impose a cost to that burden/violation of our rights.

In other words, the uninsured person is forcing us to treat his catastrophic injuries, and we should be compensated for that burden.

It would be fine if those complaining about the mandate being a violation of "rights" proposed to make medical care a "no money no care" proposition - repeal laws that require ED's/ER's to treat all comers without regard to pay. OK, make one contingent on the other - allow any provider to deny treatment to anyone without money and in the same piece of legislation, repeal the mandate. But if that's not done, the mandate just puts a price on freeloading.
 
Henrin said:
:roll: People have been forced to buy healthcare or pay a fine. That's a fact.
Click to expand...

They can get exemptions, and it's hilarious, NO ONE IS FORCED, they still have a choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom