Obamacare

Post Reply New Topic

Amen, bro' Blabby!

Ugh, the way this is playing out is making me sick. Personally, I think we should have single-payer, but the way this has played out makes me wonder if this isn't going to end in failure. Now thanks to the bad website rollout, leading to a reduced number of people on the health plans, there could end up being higher premiums, along with the much higher deductibles.

As for me, for getting sex reassignment surgery, I was considering moving to a state that requires insurance companies to cover it, but I wonder now, with deductibles and premiums, if such a move would even be worth it. I guess I would have to come up with a different plan.

Right, our representatives were concerned about people being able to keep their crappy plans that don't even cover basic medical needs because that's so important. The Republicans can't even talk about Obamacare without lying. Death panels!

Could someone please explain to me why it's okay to require everyone who drives a car to carry liability insurance, but it is not okay to require everyone who is subject to illness and injury (basically, everyone) to carry health insurance?

As an RN, I'm genuinely curious. Do the Republicans really want to "preserve" a system that drives the poor to the ER for care they will never pay for, causing higher costs for everyone else?

the GOPTP basically says, "it's not my problem."

Requiring anyone who breathes to carry health insurance is essentially a tax on life. If you are alive you owe a tax for being alive.

There is an easy solution: Anyone who does not have health insurance will be permitted to die if he cannot otherwise purchase medical services. No one will be required to render medical assistance against their will. Nor will anyone have the power to compel medical assistance.

ruveyn

Actually, requiring everyone to have insurance would deny the insurance companies the right to drop people when they need their coverage the most, and the same companies would be denied the right to refuse coverage for preexisting conditions. I'm not seeing anything bad about that.

That's a great idea.... I say we cancel medicare for everyone inconsiderate enough to live past the age of 75 too...

the logical endpoint of all this social Darwinism, is just to exterminate what the dominant culture considers to be the unfit. that would be the definitive method of making sure the "undeserving" never got anything good from anybody else.

Last edited by auntblabby on 08 Nov 2013, 12:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

^^^ Yup... and it's so much more civilized than concentration camps.

The Nazis had a description for such people: Lives not worthy of life.

....except it's a tax that you don't actually have to pay if you're poor enough, since the government purchases health care for you.

Which the right hates. God forbid the government actually should show kindness to "takers," and "eaters," just because they're poor!

The elite Republicans have got it backwards. Wall Street and the banks are the takers (they create no value) and the working poor and middle class are the makers. There is an old proverb,"if it wasn't for the poor the rich would have to eat their money."
I think they should have a program where they send the working poor (many have 2 or more jobs) into the 1%'s neighbourhoods and instruct them about the value of work.
We no longer have a work ethic, we have a gambling ethic. The creation of value (work both intellectual and manual ) is rewarded less than gambling on the productivity of others (Wall Street and the banks).

Last edited by wittgenstein on 11 Nov 2013, 9:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

^^^
unfortunately, only reeducation camps seem to work for the arrogant well-off, who will ascribe no value to the very existence to anybody these self-appointed captains of the universe perceive to be beneath them.

Obamacare looks like it may do more damage than it will fix:

http://www.wfaa.com/news/health/health- ... 01901.html