• 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 Reform Repeal Passes House

Moderator's Warning:
There has been one warning inthread, any more of this type of personal attacks will result in thread bans and more. TD, CT, if you want to discuss who is serious or relevant, take it elsewhere.
 
it will also force republican senators to explain a repeal vote to those constituents who are benefitting from the law.

Only problem with your hypothesis is that no one will be benefitting from it then.
 
what truth? post some empirical evidence to support your Fox rant

SammonEmail.png


Shocker: Fox News' Leaked E-mails Suggest Right-Wing Bias in Debate Coverage | HyperVocal
 
Last edited:
Only problem with your hypothesis is that no one will be benefitting from it then.

No one? So someone without insurance who now has it, like those families can now add, won't be benefitting?
 
whether health care is "good" or "bad" is really not relevant if it is contrary to the tenth amendment which I firmly believe it is

Good politicians address the problems of the nation and come up with solutions to fix them. Some solutions work, some don't. Afghanistan hasn't worked out too well, but you know what? At least Bush tried to address the problem of terrorism. The "War on Drugs" has been horribly inefficient but you know what? At least Nixon tried to do something about drugs in America instead of ignoring the problem.

Picture.png


This is a problem. Republicans have been ignoring it. That haven't had either the balls or the brains to come up with any solutions other than giving more tax breaks to those wealthy enough to get good insurance for their families. I'm not big on huge government programs but in this case, I'm glad Obama and the Democrats in office are trying to do something about it and hr2 is still an extremely far cry away from universal health care.
 
often times government involvement causes more problems than it solves

especially when its actions are of dubious constitutional validity

if one believes government's intentions are always altruistic such faith can be excused
 
often times government involvement causes more problems than it solves

Very true, but so far the only problem with health care reform that you've articulated is that poor little you might have to pay more in taxes. Some of us don't consider that a problem. At least most conservatives have some legitimate practical objection to it (even if I consider their objections to be misguided), but in your case it's all about you, you, you.
 
Last edited:
No one? So someone without insurance who now has it, like those families can now add, won't be benefitting?

The tiny number of people with kids returning to their parent's insurance plans will be infinitesimal compared to the number of people mad that their premiums and taxes have increased due to this bill.
 
The tiny number of people with kids returning to their parent's insurance plans will be infinitesimal compared to the number of people mad that their premiums and taxes have increased due to this bill.


Insurance rates have been historically out pacing inflation for a long time now. With or with out this bill it is a question of how much.
 
Very true, but so far the only problem with health care reform that you've articulated is that poor little you might have to pay more in taxes. Some of us don't consider that a problem. At least most conservatives have some legitimate practical objection to it (even if I consider their objections to be misguided), but in your case it's all about you, you, you.

of course you don't consider it a problem that OTHERS have to pay more taxes

and to claim I am being self centered after that rot is hilarious

maybe if you are so supportive of free healthcare you and the rest who believe in such nonsense should pony up the money


MYobjections are based on the constitution. Your attacks on me are misplaced
 
Insurance rates have been historically out pacing inflation for a long time now. With or with out this bill it is a question of how much.

And you really, really believe that insurance companies can provide all the goodies in this bill without dramatically higher rates to pay for them ????
 
And you really, really believe that insurance companies can provide all the goodies in this bill without dramatically higher rates to pay for them ????

If everyone buys insurance. Yes. And univerisal payer system would be best, the public option next best, and the mandate third best.
 
maybe if you are so supportive of free healthcare you and the rest who believe in such nonsense should pony up the money

I will gladly pay my share of the necessary taxes. And I will gladly vote for politicians who make you do the same.

TurtleDude said:
MYobjections are based on the constitution.

No they aren't. Your objections are based on the fact that you personally don't want to pay for it. This is not an atomistic, Ayn Rand utopia; this is an actual society. You reap the benefits of being a part of it, and you'll damn well pay the costs of being a part of it, whether you like it or not. There are plenty of places you can live if you prefer the atomist approach to governance; I hear Somalia is lovely this time of year.
 
Last edited:
will be DOA in the senate.

perhaps

but repeal of the mandate sure aint

and watch tester and nelson and nelson and mccaskill and manchin and a number of others squirm

cuz if they don't come our way on the mandate, they're gonna be in big trouble in 12

in places like montana and nebraska and florida and appalachia

why did manchin put the bullet thru cap and trade, why did he vote against dream and dadt

why did voters of missouri, 71%, go to the polls in august to kill the mandate

why did arizona and oklahoma approve similar measures on nov 2

what's gonna happen to big-picture obamacare if the young invulnerables are freed up from its constraints

why has his support among youth voters plummeted some 50%

seeya in 12, in nebraska, montana, north dakota...
 
And you really, really believe that insurance companies can provide all the goodies in this bill without dramatically higher rates to pay for them ????

This is a bit anecdotal, but I just received a letter from my insurance company about the changes that went into effect on January 1 of this year. My premium increased a little...but no more than it does in any other year.

From a more macroeconomic perspective, the rates need not be dramatically higher as long as everyone is required to buy insurance. It's true that if preexisting conditions were banned AND there was no individual mandate, that the rates would spiral out of control until no one had insurance. But as long as those two components are coupled together, the individual mandate will put the brakes on spiraling costs.
 
I will gladly pay my share of the necessary taxes. And I will gladly vote for politicians who make you do the same.



No they aren't. Your objections are based on the fact that you personally don't want to pay for it. This is not an atomistic, Ayn Rand utopia; this is an actual society. You reap the benefits of being a part of it, and you'll damn well pay the costs of being a part of it, whether you like it or not.


I don't reap any additional benefits by paying more taxes than you do. that is one of the great myths the left spews in order to justify their power grab that is funded by income redistribution. You pretend that you have altruistic reasons behind your welfare socialist dreams and you label those who oppose it as selfish. Yet, in reality people who feel as you do are no more altruistic than people on my side of the issue.

so lets stop pretending that the politicians who push for this are "better people" than those who oppose it
 
This is a bit anecdotal, but I just received a letter from my insurance company about the changes that went into effect on January 1 of this year. My premium increased a little...but no more than it does in any other year.

From a more macroeconomic perspective, the rates need not be dramatically higher as long as everyone is required to buy insurance. It's true that if preexisting conditions were banned AND there was no individual mandate, that the rates would spiral out of control until no one had insurance. But as long as those two components are coupled together, the individual mandate will put the brakes on spiraling costs.

the individual mandate will be stricken by the courts and with that, the whole bill will collapse
 
the individual mandate will be stricken by the courts and with that, the whole bill will collapse

You are correct that it collapses. You can't have the things people want without a way to pay for it. It will be interesting to see how the courts rule.
 
I don't reap any additional benefits by paying more taxes than you do. that is one of the great myths the left spews in order to justify their power grab that is funded by income redistribution. You pretend that you have altruistic reasons behind your welfare socialist dreams and you label those who oppose it as selfish. Yet, in reality people who feel as you do are no more altruistic than people on my side of the issue.

My comments were not directed at all "people on your side of the issue." My comments were directed at people who constantly brag about their wealth while whining about how horrible it is that they have to pay taxes to pay for the leeching peons. If that still isn't clear enough who I'm talking about, I'd spell it out but I'd probably get infracted for personal attacks. So you can figure it out for yourself.

TurtleDude said:
so lets stop pretending that the politicians who push for this are "better people" than those who oppose it

I make no such claim. Politicians who push for it are, however, on the right side of the issue from a practical standpoint.
 
the individual mandate will be stricken by the courts and with that, the whole bill will collapse

Fail. If the individual mandate is stricken by the courts (which won't happen, but for the sake of argument suppose it does) and the rest of the bill is left intact, then the private insurance industry will collapse, not the health care reform law. And you know what will happen then. Immediate, acute demand for more government intervention to fill the void left by private enterprise. So if you support a relatively free market for health insurance, you'd better be praying that the courts don't overturn the individual mandate.
 
Last edited:
Fail. If the individual mandate is stricken by the courts (which won't happen, but for the sake of argument suppose it does) and the rest of the bill is left intact, then the private insurance industry will collapse, not the health care reform law. And you know what will happen then. Immediate, acute demand for more government intervention to fill the void left by private enterprise.

The trouble is they won't. They will raise prices beyond what they're trying to do now. You can't have these things people want wihtout a way to pay for it. If the courts strike it down, we have to go back to the drawing board.
 
My comments were not directed at all "people on your side of the issue." My comments were directed at people who constantly brag about their wealth while whining about how horrible it is that they have to pay taxes to pay for the leeching peons. If that still isn't clear enough who I'm talking about, I'd spell it out but I'd probably get infracted for personal attacks. So you can figure it out for yourself.



I make no such claim. Politicians who push for it are, however, on the right side of the issue from a practical standpoint.

"right side"being the welfare socialist side

opinion noted-not shared
 
The Democrats gave us subsidies for the poor, a ban on preexisting conditions, a focus on information technology to create standardized processes, and minimum standards of acceptable coverage.

they also gave us

half trillion in cuts to medicare, all the while obama simultaneously expands its already teetering enrollment by millions:

Capitol Briefing - Senate votes to keep Medicare cuts

er costs increase:

ER visits, costs in Mass. climb - The Boston Globe

doctors refuse new medicare patients:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/business/retirementspecial/02health.html

the doc fix passes, another quarter tril unaccounted for:

Senate passes 1-year doc fix - The Hill's Healthwatch

another quarter T double counted:

Budget Office Rebuts Democratic Claims on Medicare (Update1) - Bloomberg

our already broken backed states are burdened with 200 billion in the form of brand new medicaid enrollees

Governors balk over what healthcare bill will cost states - The Boston Globe[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

The Republicans gave us a focus on higher deductible plans.

If the final version of the legislation passes the Senate, tax breaks for out-of-pocket medical deductions will be curtailed.

New Health-Care Taxes Help Obama

live it, libs, love it, it's all YOURS
 
Fail. If the individual mandate is stricken by the courts (which won't happen, but for the sake of argument suppose it does) and the rest of the bill is left intact, then the private insurance industry will collapse, not the health care reform law. And you know what will happen then. Immediate, acute demand for more government intervention to fill the void left by private enterprise. So if you support a relatively free market for health insurance, you'd better be praying that the courts don't overturn the individual mandate.

I guess we will see what happens. If the individual mandate is found NOT to violate the tenth amendment than the constitution no longer matters and this country ceases to be a constitutional republic. I suggest CJ Roberts understands that fact.
 
Back
Top Bottom