Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Health Care Mandate, First Round Goes To States.  
User currently offlinedxing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2920 times:

A U.S. district Judge has struck down the "mandate" portion of the Health Care law. It will surely be appealed.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-1...quirement-thrown-out-by-judge.html

The Obama administration’s requirement that most citizens maintain minimum health coverage as part of a broad overhaul of the industry is unconstitutional, a federal judge ruled, striking down the linchpin of the plan.

U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson in Richmond, Virginia, today said that the requirement in President Barack Obama’s health-care legislation goes beyond Congress’s powers to regulate interstate commerce. While severing the coverage mandate, which is set to become effective in 2014, Hudson didn’t address other provisions such as expanding Medicaid.

“At its core, this dispute is not simply about regulating the business of insurance -- or crafting a scheme of universal health insurance coverage -- it’s about an individual’s right to choose to participate,” wrote Hudson, who was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2002.


This can't get to the Supreme Court fast enough IMO.

104 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2747 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2911 times:

Quoting dxing (Thread starter):
This can't get to the Supreme Court fast enough IMO.

All of these suits need to be fast tracked.



OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8224 posts, RR: 26
Reply 2, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2906 times:

The fun thing about this is whichever side doesn't prevail will be crying judicial activism all over again.  


If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineLufthansa411 From Germany, joined Jan 2008, 692 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2895 times:

I wouldn't say the first round went to the states considering that of the three decisions that are in, 2 have been won by the government and now 1 has been lost. It will be interesting to see where this heads for sure.

Plus, the healthcare law will not be repealed, by the nature of how it was passed it would be nearly impossible to do. However, it is entirely possible to have certain sections shot down, as was the case in VA today. Only the mandate was found unconstitutional, not the healthcare law as a whole.

The dems were smart the way they passed this: in many parts, not as a giant whole and with a longer timeline. This means that only parts of the law can be challenged and by the time in gets to the Supreme Court in a couple of years most of the law will already be implemented and almost impossible to turn around.



Nothing in life is to be feared; it is only to be understood.
User currently offlinedxing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2880 times:

Quoting Lufthansa411 (Reply 3):
2 have been won by the government and now 1 has been lost. It will be interesting to see where this heads for sure.

That's the thing. In order for this law to work the mandate almost has to survive. The States don't need to win every time, just once at the Supreme Court level and the financing for the law is thrown into complete chaos.

Quoting Lufthansa411 (Reply 3):
Only the mandate was found unconstitutional, not the healthcare law as a whole.

Never said the entire law was. Again, the States only needed to win once. Now the federal government is forced to appeal the decision.


User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2879 times:

I suggest title of this topic should be changed to "Health Care Mandate, First Round Goes To The People".

User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4751 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2878 times:

Quoting Lufthansa411 (Reply 3):
Only the mandate was found unconstitutional, not the healthcare law as a whole.

The law itself rested on a plan of bringing patient affordability by forcing everyone to have insurance. If everyone is not required to have insurance, the plan gets expensive for the Government and further increases the deficit, and individual insurance plans. If this mandate is upheld, obamacare will need to be repealed, or the democrats will be completely destroyed in 2012 and 2014.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5734 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2852 times:

Quoting dxing (Reply 4):
That's the thing. In order for this law to work the mandate almost has to survive. The States don't need to win every time, just once at the Supreme Court level and the financing for the law is thrown into complete chaos.

Nah, it's simple really and I wish they would have done this in the first place, but all you have to do is change it from a "require to purchase" to a tax deduction. Basically establish a "medical support tax" something on the order of $7,000.00 (or $10k, $14K whatever the estimated cost is) per person and have a matching $7k deduction for providing your own. You could have exclusions and exemptions that leave the fiscal result as the same as it is now. It's simple and if the tax and deduction are crafted properly everyone will get their own insurance.

Simple.

As a fiscal conservative Republican I think that everyone MUST have health insurance/contribute toward universal access for all. And I also fully see the "wrong" in congress making it a "you must buy" requirement. That power is not granted to the congress. They overstepped their limits. Of course we will likely have to wait another two years at least with the structure of the incoming congress before this is able to be instituted. But it will happen, I do see universal access to health care coming to the USA.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8224 posts, RR: 26
Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2852 times:

Quoting 474218 (Reply 5):

I suggest title of this topic should be changed to "Health Care Mandate, First Round Goes To The People".

Utter nonsense. Given that the current system involves those of us who are insured double-paying for those who aren't through both premium increases and local taxes, this has nothing to do with "the people". The problems with the law relate to interstate commerce and the total lack of any action taken against frivolous malpractice suits.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineAlias1024 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2794 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2834 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 6):
The law itself rested on a plan of bringing patient affordability by forcing everyone to have insurance.

That's not why the requirement to have insurance was included in the law. The legislation requires insurance companies to no longer deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. Obviously, the insurance industry would be swimming in red ink if people could stay uninsured, then apply for and be guaranteed insurance only when they suffer an expensive injury or illness. The requirement to have insurance was to prevent people from doing just that.



It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11496 posts, RR: 52
Reply 10, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2812 times:

Quoting dxing (Reply 4):
Again, the States only needed to win once.

No, the states* only have to win the Superbowl. This wasn't even a playoff game.

* Most states are not interested in breaking apart this law. This case was brought by our activist AG Cuccinelli, and does not enjoy wide support by the rest of the Commonwealth. Let's not get carried away.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26022 posts, RR: 50
Reply 11, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2796 times:

I've always felt that the mandate to purchase insurance was very wrong.

After all this would be first and only time in America that the government require every man, woman and child to go out and spend money by something, namely purchasing insurance from a private business. Nuts.

If you want to take part fine, but people(and States) should have the right to opt out.

At the end of the day hopefully enough holes are made in Obamacare that it becomes a meaningless law. Also with Republicans having the House, they hopefully will refuse to pass any funding bills the next two years that sends money towards program.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20241 posts, RR: 59
Reply 12, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2786 times:

Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 9):

That's not why the requirement to have insurance was included in the law. The legislation requires insurance companies to no longer deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. Obviously, the insurance industry would be swimming in red ink if people could stay uninsured, then apply for and be guaranteed insurance only when they suffer an expensive injury or illness. The requirement to have insurance was to prevent people from doing just that.

That and also the hospitals. Hospitals are required to stabilize patients regardless of ability to pay. The problem is that very often (and I mean very often) that stabilization is no small feat.

So now you have a patient who has received a good fraction of a million dollars worth of healthcare. Oh, the hospital can go after him with collections until they've collected his testicles, but that still doesn't get them their money.

The other thing is that forcing everyone to have insurance ensures that everyone has access to primary care and preventative care. That poor uninsured schmuck who had a stroke that took out half his brain now has no way to pay for long-term care, true, but if he'd had insurance he might not have had the stroke because his 190/120 blood pressure would have been properly controlled!


User currently offlinephotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2809 posts, RR: 18
Reply 13, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2781 times:

And the World continues to laugh at the world's biggest economy and country that somehow can't even manage to have Universal Health Care for all it's citizens. Astounding really......that healthcare isn't a universal right in the USA and that petty politics and bickering takes presidence.

User currently offlineIMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6330 posts, RR: 33
Reply 14, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2774 times:

I find it a pity that my insurance company was allowed to double my premium, I now have crappy (read as useless) health insurance.

Obama, I'm sure, will again drop everything else and focus his one track mind on a problem that he is unwilling to really fix. Very sad.



Damn, this website is getting worse daily.
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2772 times:

[

Quoting photopilot (Reply 13):
And the World continues to laugh at the world's biggest economy and country that somehow can't even manage to have Universal Health Care for all it's citizens. Astounding really......that healthcare isn't a universal right in the USA and that petty politics and bickering takes presidence.


Why do you think we have the "world's biggest economy"?

Because we have resisted (up til now) the "cradle to grave coddling" that the rest of the worlds industrialized nations are now trying to get out from under.


User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3148 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2772 times:

"Despite the laudable intentions of Congress in enacting a comprehensive and transformative health care regime, the legislative process must still operate within constitutional bounds. Salutatory [sic] goals and creative drafting have never been sufficient to offset an absence of enumerated powers."

This is the heart of the decision, Congress has overstepped their contitutional bounds.

The government can not dictate that you to buy a pile of General Electric rubber dog poo, a bus, a GM car, or health insurance even with creative drafting.

Okie


User currently offlinesan747 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4952 posts, RR: 12
Reply 17, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2760 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 11):

After all this would be first and only time in America that the government require every man, woman and child to go out and spend money by something, namely purchasing insurance from a private business. Nuts.

Probably because the government understands that when an uninsured citizen uses health services without the ability to pay, the rest of us have to. Every argument I hear against illegal immigration centers on Americans having to pay for them using our hospital services (among others), but I never hear any mention of the fact that we pay just as much, if not more for uninsured Americans using hospitals. Mandating every citizen own health insurance rectifies that situation by making sure that citizen has the ability to pay for their OWN treatment and the hospital that provides them services doesn't get screwed out of (often) hundreds of thousands of dollars it costs to treat them, as Doc described.



Scotty doesn't know...
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8224 posts, RR: 26
Reply 18, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2745 times:

Quoting photopilot (Reply 13):
And the World continues to laugh at the world's biggest economy and country that somehow can't even manage to have Universal Health Care for all it's citizens.

  

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 12):
The other thing is that forcing everyone to have insurance ensures that everyone has access to primary care and preventative care. That poor uninsured schmuck who had a stroke that took out half his brain now has no way to pay for long-term care, true, but if he'd had insurance he might not have had the stroke because his 190/120 blood pressure would have been properly controlled!

Yes yes yes. People against health care for all just don't seem to grasp the reality of double-paying for others. I don't like doing it - question is why do they??

Quoting IMissPiedmont (Reply 14):
Obama, I'm sure, will again drop everything else and focus his one track mind on a problem that he is unwilling to really fix.

Yes, since his party and the other are in bed with competing interests, there is no objective view to solve the problem of malpractice abuse and prescription fraud.

Quoting 474218 (Reply 15):
Why do you think we have the "world's biggest economy"?

I don't give a fig about that if I still have to pay for other people's care two or three times like we do with the current system. Please tell me why you enjoy having to do that.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2726 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 18):
Please tell me why you enjoy having to do that.


I don't enjoy it, I pay $811 a month for health insurance for my wife and myself. I do it because if, God forbid, we do need it we have it. My insurance would be a lot less if I didn't have to pay for "government mandated" things like, covering children up to 26 on their parents policy, mental health care, drug rehab, stop smoking classes, pre-natial care and delivery (my wife had a hysterectomy 30 years ago) and dozens of other feel good items politicians require insurance companies to cover because they were looking for votes from one bleeding heart group or another.

But I can't shop around and get just the coverage I want, a simple insurance policy that will pay if I am admitted to a hospital or have a catastrophic illness and let me cover my doctors visits. That would be real "health care reform".

But Obama care does nothing to lower costs only add more mandates.


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11496 posts, RR: 52
Reply 20, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2717 times:

Quoting 474218 (Reply 19):
But Obama care does nothing to lower costs only add more mandates.

False, unless you can cite a source to back you up.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2712 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 20):

False, unless you can cite a source to back you up.


All you have to do is do something the Democrats in Congress refused to, "read the bill'.


User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 9202 posts, RR: 11
Reply 22, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2712 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 20):
I didn't have to pay for "government mandated" things like, covering children up to 26 on their parents policy

Is that not part of the new bill? It was always 21for college students, before the Healthcare bill, unless I am mistaken. It was 18, unless you went to college in my company coverage.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlinedxing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2715 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 10):
Most states are not interested in breaking apart this law.

From the story in the OP:

The ruling is the government’s first loss in a series of challenges to the law mounted in federal courts in Virginia, Michigan and Florida, where 20 states have joined an effort to have the statute thrown out.

That's 22 States and with the recent election results there are several other States that are set to join the suit or start their own. Not a majority today, but a month from now that will most likely be a different story.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 12):
So now you have a patient who has received a good fraction of a million dollars worth of healthcare.

We've discussed this before. Exactly how many times does that happen in a year at one hospital? Not many if I remember correctly. Again, the outlandish is portrayed as the norm. It seems to be the only way some can advance their argument.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 18):

Yes yes yes. People against health care for all just don't seem to grasp the reality of double-paying for others. I don't like doing it - question is why do they??

People double pay all the time. I have uninsured motorist coverage on my auto insurance policy. If my daughters attended private school as many children do, I'd be paying double as their parents do. My taxes go to support those on welfare and medicaid so in effect I pay for my own health insurance as well as indigents. Those (medicaid payments) are only set to grow with the advent of Obama Care in 2014 and is one of the main reasons that the mandate to buy has to remain. Without it those expanded medicaid roles will have their finances thrown into turmoil.


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11496 posts, RR: 52
Reply 24, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2693 times:

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 22):

Not my quote.

Quoting dxing (Reply 23):
That's 22 States

Which is not most.

Quoting dxing (Reply 23):
but a month from now that will most likely be a different story.

Yeah... your argument is reduced to a prediction into the future? That's not like you.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
25 nonrevman : I am not crazy about the healthcare bill, but the mandate is the one thing I am direly opposed to when it comes to the issue. Currently, my family of
26 D L X : Please cite the portion of the bill that supports your claim. Or admit to being wrong. Rates were going up before the health care bill for reasons en
27 WarRI1 : It was 474218. These damn computers.
28 474218 : Don't blame me, my hands were no where near your keyboard!
29 Post contains images WarRI1 : No question, I could never make a living with a computer.
30 Post contains links Aaron747 : You just don't get it - everyone's insurance will be lower down the line if more people have preventative care. Insurance companies don't really care
31 474218 : Just wait, there are still two years before the bill goes in to effect. That is unless it is found "un-constitutional, which it should be!
32 Aaron747 : Classic avoidance of the facts. That's the default go-to mode when all you have in your head are talking points. People tied to whatever rhetoric the
33 WarRI1 : It should be, your view, maybe it is not, what then? Should it still be killed, or modified over time to help your fellow citizens, and maybe your fr
34 Post contains images LAXintl : Yeah funny, I got some documents in the mail a few weeks back describing changes to our health coverage come 2011, and the rate chart guide and lette
35 Aaron747 : Differentiating between genders is ridiculous - women are more susceptible to certain degenerative diseases than men and vice versa. Why should women
36 LAXintl : I just finished reading the VA decision and its rather crafty. Judge Hudson's decision does not attack the purchase mandate up front, but takes the vi
37 Aaron747 : Health is a completely different thing - we're all going to die, that's a given. There is no opt out for dying - it's just a matter of how much pain
38 DocLightning : Often enough that in one month I saw five cases in medical school. No end-of-life planning or advance directives, unreasonable families threatening t
39 LAXintl : Emotion yes absolutely as it effects me and my family. As I stated in threads in the last year, I have lived under European government managed centra
40 Post contains links and images Aaron747 : Nobody is making that happen here - expanding coverage is the name of the game. On the side of quality of technique and options for care, probably tr
41 LAXintl : Like everything, health care is a commodity and its OK if access is not equal. That is actually the beauty of our existing system imo. You can have t
42 Aaron747 : Mighty convenient for government if they choose not to do so, but those who go to the trouble to get an R.N. or M.D. behind their name have a profess
43 simonriat : I feel I need to respond to this as I have worked for the National Health Service, here in the UK, for several years (Don't anymore due to politics)
44 Post contains links dxing : Which is what I said. Given the election results at the State level its not that hard of a prediction to make. Completely applicable as they have the
45 ltbewr : I am in the view of what many here would call a 'liberal', but I do have issues with the health care insurance purchase mandate despite it's good inte
46 dxing : Since it is national healthcare the government bureaucrats are the involved in the same way as insurance companies are over here. Are you going to de
47 LAXintl : Experiences has been in Sweden, Belgium and Spain, from the early 70's till mid 90's. My experience is wait list in the US are rather minimal as ther
48 windy95 : SOrry but most of the country wants this repealed. And it does not matter whether you think he is an activist the mandate is unconstitutional. Then w
49 FlyPNS1 : That's fine, as long as you are comfortable with millions of American's with no healthcare spreading their disease and problems to the rest of societ
50 dxing : Simonriat's point was that somehow NHS does a better job of taking care of their constituents than our form of healthcare which I would disagree with
51 windy95 : What is dragging us down and driving costs up is Uncle Sam. If they actually went after the cost in this bill instead of ideology our healtcare syste
52 Mir : Because while the plan sounds good on the surface, you'd have a couple of states with company-friendly laws determine the health insurance laws for t
53 dxing : So, the government under Obamacare is going to tell you what you have to have in an insurance policy which will quite conceivably make them more expe
54 windy95 : Sorry but auto, accident and life are all sold across state lines without any problems. More choice is always better and will bring cost down. Limiti
55 FlyPNS1 : You might disagree, but the fact is that most of Europe spends less per person on healthcare than America, has similar (if not longer life expectanci
56 Post contains links dxing : We spend more because we can afford it. They spend less, but they also pay their medical staff's less, wait longer, and in some cases, depending upon
57 WarRI1 : Once again, an answer for every scenario. We spend more because we can afford it, highly laughable once again, we will be a third world economy witho
58 D L X : Funny enough, it was the seminal case on commerce clause (Wickard v. Filburn) that in fact DID show that the federal government can regulate individu
59 dxing : The numbers don't lie. Just look at the number of elective cosmetic surgeries performed annually in this country. People in this country spend money
60 Post contains images Aaron747 : Not if it's going to cost me later. 99 out of 100 people will seek treatment for ailment or injury regardless of whether they are insured - you can b
61 PPVRA : The only intellectual dishonesty is calling something "insurance" when it isn't. Regulations that force people to buy "insurance" for yearly medical
62 Aaron747 : Look, everyone knows that the big health insurers are going to win out big-time from this, and most certainly big pharma too. But there's nothing tha
63 DocLightning : Remarkably few, because the patients with insurance typically had their preventative healthcare and didn't get into these sorts of messes. It's truly
64 PPVRA : The semantics issue is what you hear from politicians. Whether they are being deceitful or just ignorant, deregulation will fix it regardless. Over t
65 FlyPNS1 : Then you won't have any problem paying MORE taxes to support Medicare/Medicaid, since "we can afford it". Since you don't want to mandate insurance (
66 Mir : At least I have a say in HHS policy by being able to vote for the president that appoints HHS' leader. Whereas, unless I happen to live in a state wi
67 PPVRA : The more we are able to mitigate risks, the less insurance makes sense. Likewise, the more we are able to predict pilot's health, the more we eat int
68 dxing : Except it doesn't work that way. Once you open up all services to all the people, without them having to pay a dime, or paying a drastically reduced
69 Zentraedi : First of all, "You should have to pay because it doesn't happen often" is still a nonsequitur. Second, every time this comes up the justification for
70 Post contains links san747 : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_spite You argue and articulate your points well, and even th
71 Aaron747 : Support jobs in the medical profession are already predicted to be among the fastest growing job sectors the next 25 years. There is nothing wrong wi
72 simonriat : I think Fly amongst others have given enough for me not to comment on most of your points, however with regard to the above. So I think the example I
73 Post contains links FlyPNS1 : A majority of American's support having a government health insurance option. Yet you don't want them to have it. What's wrong with this picture? htt
74 Post contains images windy95 : To much government intervention/regulation. And now you want to fix it by adding more government. Eliminate the middle man of Uncle Sam and you will
75 windy95 : Five clauses in the Constitution: Art. I, §8, cl.1; Art. I, § 9, cl.5; Art. I, § 9, cl.6; Art. I, §10, cl.2; & Art. I, §10, cl.3, give expre
76 D L X : That's rich! Care to provide some facts to back that up? I'm not opposed to that. But do you know who is? Your precious "states' rights" people. Peop
77 windy95 : I have never heard anybody claim states rights when it comes to interstate commerce. Including myself. Enumerated powers is what we are talking about
78 windy95 : It seems eveyone but you knows that Medicare has skewed the system way out of order. Then add on top of that the costs of insurance from mandates tha
79 PPVRA : More sophist reasoning from the left. I have no problem at all if you want a public option, just keep me and my finances out of it if I choose not to
80 windy95 : Agree I am sure they do as long as someone else is paying for it. It is "free" after all. Just like people who enjoy public schools because someone e
81 san747 : I wasn't aware that public schools were student's only option. I guess the charter school my father teaches at and I graduated from, nor the private
82 FlyPNS1 : You're missing the point. Dxing believes that we should follow opinion polls on the issues. I simply cited the opinion polls that he believes we shou
83 Aaron747 : Yes, and nice of you to ignore the experiences of those of us who have also lived overseas and experienced successful systems that don't have atrocio
84 LAXintl : And nothing wrong with that. Matter of fact its a wonderful thing to let capitalism work. As a business owner myself, I have no problem seeing compan
85 D L X : Don't get me wrong. As a person in a service industry that makes money by providing a service, I am all about capitalism. But here's the big differen
86 PPVRA : And if you voted for neither? What if you voted for one because you expected him not to bail anybody out, but then he turned around and bailout every
87 D L X : That's democracy. Sometimes your brethren disagree with you and vote a different way than you did. All you can say is maybe your guy will win next ti
88 Post contains links dxing : Anyone trying to use an extreme minority as a logical reason to do anything is pretty ludicrous. Using examples that are far and few inbetween is als
89 Aaron747 : Both repairs if you ask me. They should be covered. Eyesight and healthy teeth are not optional care in my book. As is the current system. I have the
90 D L X : Exactly. It seems the people doing the most complaining are also people who have never actually been terribly sick.
91 dxing : Not really, as I said I could have gotten a bridge and the insurance company would have paid 80%, but I didn't want to damage to perfectly good teeth
92 D L X : No, I think you misunderstand my point. Your arguments are often rather uninformed because you haven't experienced the current American system (let a
93 Post contains images dxing : I've lived in the United States my entire life. Again, I can read so the experience that some individuals face in some overseas markets does not need
94 windy95 : B.S. My Wife, Son and Mother in law all use multiple specialist. WIth private insurance they have never had to wait nor ever been denied an operation
95 Aaron747 : That doesn't have to be the case as there are plenty of universal health care systems where one can shop providers as they please. Yes, but those are
96 dxing : But as described in Obama care, that is not the direction we are headed in. Unfortunately it is the one our governement seems to lean too. I would di
97 Aaron747 : Fair enough, but I expect rampant dissatisfaction with inability to choose providers among those who go onto the public option - which will have to b
98 D L X : Only if you ignore fact. FACT: you can keep your own health care provider. Has anyone else noticed lately that to accept Republican ideas requires ig
99 Post contains links dxing : Fact: The only way that some employers are being able to offer even miminum insuance to their lowest paid workers is if the Obama administration gran
100 dxing : I'm still betting that you could get in far faster to see the person you need to see than you think, and much faster than in some other health care s
101 D L X : Your health care should not be tied to your employer anyway. That's a crippling connection. Can you imagine if your car insurance was tied to your em
102 seb146 : Two problems I have with this: 1. In the title of the thread "First Round Goes To States" should be changed to "First Round Goes To Corporations." 2.
103 dxing : Different argument.
104 windy95 : How so? All I was doing with this answer was responding to DLX's claim of Which in my thirty years of using private insurance I have never seen anyth
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Senate Debate On Health Care To End Soon posted Sun Dec 20 2009 14:56:35 by Propilot83
Obama To Be On TV More - Health Care Reform posted Thu Sep 17 2009 12:48:00 by Homer71
Whatever Happened To The Bush Health Care Plan? posted Sun Feb 11 2007 22:23:04 by N1120A
NBA: Spurs, Cavs Look To Close Out First Round posted Sat May 6 2006 02:05:11 by Falcon84
Say No To Universal Health Care posted Mon Dec 1 2003 18:01:52 by Matt D
PC Malware Goes To Porn Sites posted Tue May 4 2010 15:04:25 by comorin
Health Care Reform Passed (Part 3) posted Sun Mar 28 2010 04:16:25 by SA7700
Health Care Reform Passed (Part 2) posted Mon Mar 22 2010 18:18:06 by starac17
Health Care Reform Passed! posted Sun Mar 21 2010 19:58:53 by Yellowstone
Obama Admits Health Care Could Be His Waterloo! posted Thu Mar 18 2010 08:02:31 by DXing