what is obamacare anyways

[z31maniac]

that is not what obamacare is about
and some of the reg's crammed down our collective throats have some merit
why the fed has to get involved i don't know. my health insurances (last two) have had preventative free (or at least paid for).

As usual, you're so busy eating the Glen Beck conspiracy that you ignore what you know is the main point.

If giving people preventative care reduces the cost of emergency room visits, how is that bad, or restricting your freedoms?

[gwb72tii]

How is that not what it's about? Do you have another right wing conspiracy explaining how it's meant to control our lives?


That's the problem. Your insurance covered it, most plans don't and many, many people (including myself) cannot get health insurance because of pre-existing conditions or simply cannot afford it.


Nothing's coming up. Could you copy/past it in a post or PM?

only if you say please:-)

actually if you sign up its free and the site has lots of opinion on economics around the world. it is NOT some right wing lunatic website.

you can't see the graphs?

and for obamacare, as i said there are provisions that were supported by many on both sides. and if you check, pre-existing conditions was one. not by all, but by many.
obama care is designed for one purpose, to kill private insurers and get everyone into gov't healthcare, that is it. the democrats don't give a shit about you or me. most repub's don't either.

[Cliche Guevara]

that is not what obamacare is about

How is that not what it's about? Do you have another right wing conspiracy explaining how it's meant to control our lives?

why the fed has to get involved i don't know. my health insurances (last two) have had preventative free (or at least paid for).

That's the problem. Your insurance covered it, most plans don't and many, many people (including myself) cannot get health insurance because of pre-existing conditions or simply cannot afford it.

here you go cliche
forgot about the subscription, although its free

the top dotted line is present day budgets
the middle is with realistic cuts in spending
the bottom is draconian cuts. france is greece in 2 years

Nothing's coming up. Could you copy/past it in a post or PM?

[gwb72tii]

here you go cliche
forgot about the subscription, although its free

the top dotted line is present day budgets
the middle is with realistic cuts in spending
the bottom is draconian cuts. france is greece in 2 years

[gwb72tii]

Explain how providing preventative care absolves personal responsibility?

that is not what obamacare is about
and some of the reg's crammed down our collective throats have some merit
why the fed has to get involved i don't know. my health insurances (last two) have had preventative free (or at least paid for).

[Cliche Guevara]

Nope not particularity. But you still have not answered my question about where govt in general and OURS in particular can derive the power to arbitrarily add health care to its core role in our lives. My heath is not a concern of the govt nor should it be

I haven't answered it yet because you hadn't asked lol. You inquired about the timing of UHC and made no mention of the constitutional justification. I can't read your mind, dude. Still, I'll happily answer your new question. Government funded health care is constitutional under the commerce clause, simple as that. It's the exact same constitutional justification as medicare/medicaid.

It seems like you don't understand the meaning of "arbitrary." It means random and without reason, and our desire to save lives and improve the quality of life is the antithesis of arbitrary.

Where do you get off saying I dont?? I do, frankly. But its a system I have to live with, and been paying into since I was 14. So yeah I WANT MY MONEY BACK OUT. Recent report I read show Our parents generation going forward will get back less than they put in

Hey, I gotta applaud you for being consistent. This is an argument for another time, however.

under the old rules you could not be turned away for lack of ability to pay or lack of insurance.

That's still the case. A more thorough explanation of
that law would be that hospitals cannot turn people away in life threatening emergencies. They can (and do) still tell you to fuck off if you can't pay for cancer treatment or medications for life threatening but treatable diseases. As Kershaw explained earlier, that approach is horribly expensive and is part of why we spend by far the most money on health care in the world.

People die, its going to happen to all of us one day. While it sucks some go sooner than they should, it will always remain a fact of life.

You're trying to imply that you care about their lives, but you're attitude towards the problem seems to just be "fuck it." It's a fact of life in America, that's for sure, but every other first-world nation deals with needless, health related deaths on a far lower frequency.

You didnt really think I didnt all ready know this??? It was a tongue in Cheek statement

Meh, it's hard to tell with your lot sometimes. I still maintain that your quoting an insignificant, irrelevant politician from the nineteenth century give zero credence to your argument.

here you go cliche
what an apt name, cliche

You're cute.

http://www.mauldineconomics.com/frontlinethoughts/the-lion-in-the-grass

What's that about? I'm not gonna subscribe just to read that article.

Explain how providing preventative care absolves personal responsibility?

If you have empathy then you're against personal responsibility. Duh.

[z31maniac]

wow kershaw, it sounds almost like you endorse personal responsibility, exactly what o-care is not about

Explain how providing preventative care absolves personal responsibility?

[gwb72tii]

Because some of us find it absolutely appalling that people are dieing by the thousands from treatable ailments simply because they are unable to acquire health insurance. A just, modern society should not sit idly by while this happens.


Source? Oh, nevermind. I forgot you just pull shit out of your ass. Carry on.


Read my post again. I very clearly stated that their fiscal problems are rooted in the fact that they have too many frivolous entitlements, and that a UHC program is perfectly feasible with a balanced entitlement system. Never did I state that UHC wasn't an entitlement Reading comprehension, give it a try.

here you go cliche
what an apt name, cliche

http://www.mauldineconomics.com/frontlinethoughts/the-lion-in-the-grass

[gwb72tii]

letting people die from lack of care by the thousands and not caring is almost sociopathic. these are our fellow humans. it takes a lot more than just me and my money for me to get ahead in the world. i understand that. and, a healthier society is a more productive society.



yes and that's a really expensive way to do things. obamacare saves us money by regulating the healthcare industry. an on ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure and all that.

i agree with z31 as well. if you're a lazy fat fuck, your insurance premiums should be through the roof. conversely, if you take fitness seriously, your premiums should be lower than normal.

wow kershaw, it sounds almost like you endorse personal responsibility, exactly what o-care is not about

[Kershaw]

letting people die from lack of care by the thousands and not caring is almost sociopathic. these are our fellow humans. it takes a lot more than just me and my money for me to get ahead in the world. i understand that. and, a healthier society is a more productive society.

under the old rules you could not be turned away for lack of ability to pay or lack of insurance.

yes and that's a really expensive way to do things. obamacare saves us money by regulating the healthcare industry. an on ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure and all that.

i agree with z31 as well. if you're a lazy fat fuck, your insurance premiums should be through the roof. conversely, if you take fitness seriously, your premiums should be lower than normal.

[z31maniac]

Cliche, I'm FOR universal healthcare (although I think there were better ways to go about it than Obamacare) yet I'm all for dismantling the pyramid scheme that is social security as well.

And if you're an obese fuck on cholesterol and high blood pressure meds, you don't get to whine about healthcare because you're too lazy to go jog a few times a week and put down the big mac and twinkies.

[mrsleeve]

Let me get this straight, you're saying that because people have died en masse in the past that we should continue not giving a shit about people fucking dieing? That's absurd and almost inhuman in it's lacking of empathy. What makes now different is that our government has the capacity to properly fund healthcare for every individual.

Nope not particularity. But you still have not answered my question about where govt in general and OURS in particular can derive the power to arbitrarily add health care to its core role in our lives. My heath is not a concern of the govt nor should it be

We are using tax money to improve and save people's lives. If you truly endorse the above opinion then you would support ending social security. The principle applies to both exactly the same.

Where do you get off saying I dont?? I do, frankly. But its a system I have to live with, and been paying into since I was 14. So yeah I WANT MY MONEY BACK OUT. Recent report I read show Our parents generation going forward will get back less than they put in

If this diatribe from one of our more unremarkable presidents were true then we wouldn't have people dieing by the thousands every year because they cannot acquire health insurance. That simple and disturbing fact invalidates his argument.

under the old rules you could not be turned away for lack of ability to pay or lack of insurance. People die, its going to happen to all of us one day. While it sucks some go sooner than they should, it will always remain a fact of life.

Bahahahah!!! Really? You're really pointing that out as though it has any relevance to the discussion? Cleveland was a Democrat at a time when the dems were the right winger. Lincoln and TR were Republicans, but they were some of the more progressive presidents we've had. Surely you're aware that the parties essentially swapped ideologies around the time of FDR. Hell, we've had a conservative relic in the Democratic party as recently as 04 with Zel Miller.

You didnt really think I didnt all ready know this??? It was a tongue in Cheek statement

[Cliche Guevara]

You still really have not answered the question.

People have died by the millions of all sorts of shit since the birth of the species all those times were "modern" too them, why is our time period so special?? . kinda makes that a moot point huh .

Let me get this straight, you're saying that because people have died en masse in the past that we should continue not giving a shit about people fucking dieing? That's absurd and almost inhuman in it's lacking of empathy. What makes now different is that our government has the capacity to properly fund healthcare for every individual.

"How is the legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime." - from, The Law - Bastiat

Yeah basically 0 care and all entitlements programs are based on this fact

We are using tax money to improve and save people's lives. If you truly endorse the above opinion then you would support ending social security. The principle applies to both exactly the same.

Though the people support the government; the government should not support the people - Grover Cleveland


Here how about the a couple of paragraphs from where that line comes from while we are at it, if you want the context


I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that "Though the people support the government; the government should not support the people."

The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow-citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood. - Grover Cleveland

If this diatribe from one of our more unremarkable presidents were true then we wouldn't have people dieing by the thousands every year because they cannot acquire health insurance. That simple and disturbing fact invalidates his argument.

Oh and he was a Democrat

Bahahahah!!! Really? You're really pointing that out as though it has any relevance to the discussion? Cleveland was a Democrat at a time when the dems were the right winger. Lincoln and TR were Republicans, but they were some of the more progressive presidents we've had. Surely you're aware that the parties essentially swapped ideologies around the time of FDR. Hell, we've had a conservative relic in the Democratic party as recently as 04 with Zel Miller.

[mrsleeve]

Because some of us find it absolutely appalling that people are dieing by the thousands from treatable ailments simply because they are unable to acquire health insurance. A just, modern society should not sit idly by while this happens.


.

You still really have not answered the question.

People have died by the millions of all sorts of shit since the birth of the species all those times were "modern" too them, why is our time period so special?? . kinda makes that a moot point huh .


"How is the legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime." - from, The Law - Bastiat

Yeah basically 0 care and all entitlements programs are based on this fact

Though the people support the government; the government should not support the people - Grover Cleveland


Here how about the a couple of paragraphs from where that line comes from while we are at it, if you want the context


I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that "Though the people support the government; the government should not support the people."

The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow-citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood. - Grover Cleveland


Oh and he was a Democrat

[Cliche Guevara]

Um. Just a question here. Why is that healt care should be a service provided by govt. When did that become a fundemental corrner stone of the function and role of govt in the governed lives????

Because some of us find it absolutely appalling that people are dieing by the thousands from treatable ailments simply because they are unable to acquire health insurance. A just, modern society should not sit idly by while this happens.

you need to dig deeper than whatever one page talking memo you read
germany is headed to a cliff as well, just not a soon as the others

Source? Oh, nevermind. I forgot you just pull shit out of your ass. Carry on.

oh, and universal healthcare IS an entitlement, according to european womb-to-tomb economies

Read my post again. I very clearly stated that their fiscal problems are rooted in the fact that they have too many frivolous entitlements, and that a UHC program is perfectly feasible with a balanced entitlement system. Never did I state that UHC wasn't an entitlement Reading comprehension, give it a try.