• 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 Question

gabehwkns

gabehwkns

Banned
Joined
Nov 11, 2009
Messages
58
Reaction score
11
Location
Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Being just a student my ideas on politics are hardly set in stone and I'm always open to changing my opinion if I should. I had a question about the issue of health care, specifically Obama's plan, for those more educated on the matter.

They way I understand it, the goal of this bill is to create competition between government run health care and insurance provided care. The government run plans would (in theory) be better and more affordable so that people will switch to government run plans and insurance companies will be forced to offer coverage at a lower, more affordable rate in order to keep the organization running.

I know that's probably not all of it, but I think it's the gist. Please correct me on any misunderstanding.

But here's my question. Given I am understanding this correctly, won't the insurance companies just lobby the government for the profits they need to keep their business running and then jack up their rates again?
 
gabehwkns said:
Being just a student my ideas on politics are hardly set in stone and I'm always open to changing my opinion if I should. I had a question about the issue of health care, specifically Obama's plan, for those more educated on the matter.

They way I understand it, the goal of this bill is to create competition between government run health care and insurance provided care. The government run plans would (in theory) be better and more affordable so that people will switch to government run plans and insurance companies will be forced to offer coverage at a lower, more affordable rate in order to keep the organization running.

I know that's probably not all of it, but I think it's the gist. Please correct me on any misunderstanding.

But here's my question. Given I am understanding this correctly, won't the insurance companies just lobby the government for the profits they need to keep their business running and then jack up their rates again?
Click to expand...

In the previous century a man came to power in russia named joseph stalin. One of his tactics, keep in mind was displayed as a way of protecting people to some degree (something similar to bill hr 875 that was proposed this year), to control and kill those he didn't wish to live was to control food. He made it a law that all food production and food harvested was now property of the government. Any who tried to continue to grow food were killed or sent to prison camps where they were worked to death.
I see a very strong similarity between government run -anything- and things of what joseph stalin did. It has been made law that children -must- go to public schools and receive physical check ups and inoculations. As some have learned, these inoculations contain extremely toxic substances such as mercury and lead. To suggest that on one smaller level they would force upon the population that would cause people to become weak and sickly is horrifying and disgusting. But imagine if they controlled every aspect of the medical industry. Western medicine in general is a horror, they give out chemo therapy like candy on Halloween and vaccines too (both are of no benefit to humans and also kill us).

Maybe it is true, it would be cheaper over all for the masses to have a singular health care plan, but the fear is the control it puts on everyones lives. The government isn't meant to do this, something all should keep in mind, to give to one they must take from another. What made this country great wasn't it's people, natural resources, size or anything of the like. It was what the government wasn't enabled to do. There is a portion of the constitution that is called the bill of rights, this portion should probably have been called something slightly different as it leads one to believe it has to do with freedom. This portion of the constitution has primarily to do with what the government isn't allowed to have anything to do with. All of these rules have been broken, the government now does whatever it wishes to do.
 
gabehwkns said:
The government run plans would (in theory) be better and more affordable so that people will switch to government run plans and insurance companies will be forced to offer coverage at a lower, more affordable rate in order to keep the organization running.
Click to expand...
Most people won't actually be eligible to enroll in the public option. It's just going to compete with the private plans offered in the exchange for people who can't get insurance from an employer.
 
Whip Comes Down said:
Most people won't actually be eligible to enroll in the public option. It's just going to compete with the private plans offered in the exchange for people who can't get insurance from an employer.
Click to expand...

And what happens when employers realize they will save money dumping their "healthcare" leaving people forced to joint eh "public option"?

Also, no business can compete with a government funded program. Why? Because such programs don't run by the rules every other business does, I.E. they don't have to make a profit.
 
Whip Comes Down said:
That's one of the goals, boo dog.
Click to expand...

No, that's the claim they make to get people to accept it. The goal is Single Payer Healthcare. Why Single Payer? It's not because they give a damn about your health, it's because the number one way to ensure people vote for the Dems is to enslave them into a system that they become Dependant on. I.E. "Free Healthcare"
 
MrVicchio said:
No, that's the claim they make to get people to accept it. The goal is Single Payer Healthcare. Why Single Payer? It's not because they give a damn about your health, it's because the number one way to ensure people vote for the Dems is to enslave them into a system that they become Dependant on. I.E. "Free Healthcare"
Click to expand...

Though your opinon of single-payer is probably true of a lot of Democrats in Congress, I do think that there are a select few of people who genuinely support single-payer because they view health care as a basic right and the government should provide and protect that without the abuse of insurance companies even being a possibility, much like myself.

But I do see your point on the issue.
 
gabehwkns said:
Though your opinon of single-payer is probably true of a lot of Democrats in Congress, I do think that there are a select few of people who genuinely support single-payer because they view health care as a basic right and the government should provide and protect that without the abuse of insurance companies even being a possibility, much like myself.

But I do see your point on the issue.
Click to expand...
i would welcome a single payer system.
 
gabehwkns said:
Though your opinon of single-payer is probably true of a lot of Democrats in Congress, I do think that there are a select few of people who genuinely support single-payer because they view health care as a basic right and the government should provide and protect that without the abuse of insurance companies even being a possibility, much like myself.

But I do see your point on the issue.
Click to expand...



Oh I know that a lot of "regular folks" out there think that it's a moral duty, an obligation we as a nation must provide for everyone. They do so out of an honest belief that only a method like this can prevent horrible problems. I think they are sadly misguided and completely wrong... but that's not the point.

The POLITICAL CALCULATION is what I was zero'ing in on.
 
MrVicchio said:
Why?

Do you believe that you are entitled to the hard work of other people?
Click to expand...
excuse me mr vicchio.....i make a nice living. i pay plenty in taxes. i don't anticipate anything in my income range would be free.


FAIL
 
liblady said:
excuse me mr vicchio.....i make a nice living. i pay plenty in taxes. i don't anticipate anything in my income range would be free.


FAIL
Click to expand...
Not fail, you support Single Payer. Which is taking money from people to give to others. Legalized theft to provide a service or good to another.
 
liblady said:
LOLOLOL......no state income tax in fl. and i highly doubt you're taxed at 50%. too funny.
Click to expand...

What about NY or Mass or Wis. On average if you include all taxes like sales and gas and property you will find it is close to 50%


Don't worry they are already setting up rationing by telling women they don't need a mammogram til 50.
 
Last edited:
MrVicchio said:
And what happens when employers realize they will save money dumping their "health care" leaving people forced to joint eh "public option"?
Click to expand...
That won't happen, boo. If it does, they will increase the penalty.

Also, no business can compete with a government funded program.
Click to expand...
If that be, then we should abolish business.

Because such programs don't run by the rules every other business does, I.E. they don't have to make a profit.
Click to expand...
That sounds like a good reason to establish a government run program.
 
MrVicchio said:
Oh I know that a lot of "regular folks" out there think that it's a moral duty, an obligation we as a nation must provide for everyone. They do so out of an honest belief that only a method like this can prevent horrible problems. I think they are sadly misguided and completely wrong.
Click to expand...
You are the one that is misguided and completely wrong. If we hadn't adopted the social reforms advocated by the Progressives, we would have gone communist or the bad version of socialism.
 
Last edited:
MrVicchio said:
And what happens when employers realize they will save money dumping their "healthcare" leaving people forced to joint eh "public option"?

Also, no business can compete with a government funded program. Why? Because such programs don't run by the rules every other business does, I.E. they don't have to make a profit.
Click to expand...

Private insurance supplements the public system. For example, para practitioners (chiropractic, physiotherapy, chiropody, podiatry, massage therapy, acupuncture), some lab testing, administrative fees, etc. are not covered under the public system. Having private insurance is still a good idea.

The current American system creates an environment where private insurers are the primary providers. Since they operate strictly upon a profit incentive, it's difficult to regulate their behavior. By relegating them to supplemental status only, it reduces their role and thus controls their behaviors.

I think it will work, even if the detractors are dragged kicking and screaming into the process.
 
MrVicchio said:
No, that's the claim they make to get people to accept it. The goal is Single Payer Healthcare. Why Single Payer? It's not because they give a damn about your health, it's because the number one way to ensure people vote for the Dems is to enslave them into a system that they become Dependant on. I.E. "Free Healthcare"
Click to expand...
Dude, under Section 322 of the House Bill, the Secretary is required to establish premium rates for the public health insurance option at a level sufficient to fully finance the costs of health benefits provided by the public health insurance option; and administrative costs related to operating the public health insurance option.

http://docs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom