The Health Care Law.

[rebelcowboysnb]

Legally it is a tax so my question is, why was the vote not 9 to 0 instead of 5 to 4

My opinion, if you cant get a 100% vote on weather a law is constitutional from a board of 9 judges then it should be called unconstitutional.

If we cant change the Constitution with a 5/9th vote from congress why can that ratio change in the court room...

 

[hemet dennis]

I've been paying out of pocket for our family of 4's health care for the last 6 years. Its much cheaper than paying for insurance. I think the REAL problem with our health care system is the outrageous cost of services. If there were no insurance in existance a hospital could not get away with charging $60,000 for a 4 night hospital stay. Maybe we need to get to the real root of the problem and fix that. $1200 a month for Humira? Bet they don't pay that in other countries and we probably financed the research.
I want to add I'm at the beach right now. 1/2 the people here are obese, a bunch are smoking and others are cooking in the sun. There's also a kid behind me polishing off a huge bag of potato chips. If people had to take more financial resonsibility for their health maybe they'd make better lifestyle choices.

Humira research was financed with private money. Do you have any idea how much it cost to develop, test, get approval, and market a new drug ? The time and investment ? And then the possibility of someone else coming out with a better one at the same time so they may loss millions for nothing. Who should pay for all the failures ?

People should be able to buy major medical insurance, and you pay for your own care for a hang nail. Some people rush their kids to the doctor or emergency room at every sniffle and who pays for that ? It's like if you're a good driver should you pay the same for insurance as a person who has 5 or 6 accidents ?

 

[hemet dennis]

They have not been doing there job for over 100 years.

Maybe not to your standard.

 

[hemet dennis]

My opinion, if you cant get a 100% vote on weather a law is constitutional from a board of 9 judges then it should be called unconstitutional.

If we cant change the Constitution with a 5/9th vote from congress why can that ratio change in the court room...

Wouldn't you have to change the constitution for that ? Why not just have one judge ? Then it should come out 100% most of the time.

 

[PaulaSB12]

Hang on I was 30 something living with my parents why? Because my father had his home repossessed and worked in Hong Kong for a few years before moving back in with my mother and myself. She could only have a house if I went into it with her otherwise she was going to be homeless she couldn't afford to rent anything and no way could she buy a home. So we brought a house together and she had a home until she died in february. Just because you share a home with your parents doesn't mean you are financially bad it can be done to help the parent or would have been better for her to be homeless. As for health care my mother had great treatment from the nhs what is wrong with that when so many people cant either afford insurance or because of pre existing conditions cant get insurance.

 

[hemet dennis]

Hang on I was 30 something living with my parents why? Because my father had his home repossessed and worked in Hong Kong for a few years before moving back in with my mother and myself. She could only have a house if I went into it with her otherwise she was going to be homeless she couldn't afford to rent anything and no way could she buy a home. So we brought a house together and she had a home until she died in february. Just because you share a home with your parents doesn't mean you are financially bad it can be done to help the parent or would have been better for her to be homeless. As for health care my mother had great treatment from the nhs what is wrong with that when so many people cant either afford insurance or because of pre existing conditions cant get insurance.

I don't think anyone was talking about your case more to the kids that move back in with parents and pay no or little rent because it's easier then having to go out and get a good job and support themselves.

 

[Royd]

I'm not quite sure where you are coming from on this. There is nothing in here that forces a parent to keep their kids on their insurance when they are 25 or to pay for that coverage. It does give parents an option, but there is nothing here that keeps them from kicking the kids out at 18 or keep paying the kids expenses until they are 35. That is a personal choice.
We sort of did this with our kids. There were limits all their lives, but certain things kicked in when they graduated from high school. If they went to college, they got a certain level of support, not unlimited and not a total free ride, but more support than if they did not attend college. Some did, some did not. By age 25, regardless, they were on their own. We set that limit early on and they knew what those limits were long before they hit 18.
Our youngest was affected by this age 25 thing. We kept him on our insurance that extra year because the rates were cheaper than he could get on his own. He was working and paying his bills. I did not say I paid for that premium. I said we kept him on our policy because it was the cheapest option. Our personal choice.
I'm not sure what you want. Are you suggesting that government should mandate that parents stop supporting their kids at a certain age and leave then on their own? That is more government interference in my personal life than I want. A lot more government interference. Exactly what do you want?
Chickened, I agree. If you force the insurance companies to cover people they don't want to cover, the overall cost is going to go up. It has nothing to do with "government" running the program itself. By mandating more coverage, the costs will go up. The insurance companies will see to that.
By congress voting to spread that cost out to more people, they have imposed a tax to cover those costs. I think Roberts got it right. It is a tax.
You may notice that I did not say I am for or against any part of this. There are some parts I'm OK with but some I really don't like, but that is not what my post is about. I personally don't like government interference with my personal, private life. But I used to work in "Big Business". From what I have seen, I don't want to throw all regulations out the window and let them have a total free reign. I really don't think most of us would want to live in that type of world. But they need enough freedom to make decisions. It is a balancing act.
Some of my opinions come from the coal fields of Appalachia, though that went on before I was born. Those mountain folks don’t forget real easily. I know what Tennessee Ernie was talking about in “16 Tons”.
Something I think would really help would be to give business some stability. Set the ground rules and leave them alone for a while so they can plan. This bouncing back and forth from free reign to putting the clamps on to free reign every election cycle really makes it hard for them to know what to do. A lot of their planning goes beyond the next election cycle.

I'm saying that it is basically a vote buying scheme. They have gone after the entitlement generation, with this particular item. Sure, it's not forced, but the fact is, if a healthy 24 yr. old is working and pulling down just enough to stay alive, under the new law, he either gets his own insurance, stays on the parent's policy, or pays a fine/tax to the government, even though, in all reality, he may not need any health services until he's retirement age.
It really is all about taking away personal freedom and putting every aspect of your life under the powerful auspices of the government.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

Quote:

No they started saying the Constitution says this but we are making an exemption for this that or another reason. That is not there job. There is a way to amend the Constitution, them doing it on there own is not the way...


Cases..

The drug dog eximption to the 4th

The short shotgun eximption to the 2nd

The DUI checkpoint to the 4th


An on an on...

 

[hemet dennis]

Roberts repeatedly asked in the early days of this case if the fine was a tax...and it was repeatedly claimed that it was NOT a tax.....this whole thing is a shell game. I am all for voting everyone out until things get back on track...

If you stand before a court and say a red ball is blue does the court have to agree with you ?

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

Quote: Yes you would an no one judge would be bad...