The Health Care Law.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Newbie here, just chiming in.

To start, I was raised a Republican, but over the last few years I've decided I'm pretty much center of the road - I'm tired of all the partisan back-biting. That said, there are a lot of misnomers about the health care law floating around - largely due to politicians twisting the truth to make things seem better or worse than what they are.

For those who are mad enough to leave the country over this, please remember that many other 1st world countries have government-run healthcare... Canada, England, much of Europe... so if you don't like this piece of legislation, do some research prior to packing up your house.

The cost of medical care for uninsured people (who can't afford to pay) is in the hundreds of millions each year. Through the trickle-down effect, that ends up swallowing up hundreds of millions in tax-payer dollars. Sure - it's easy to say a health 28-year-old should have the *freedom* to not have health insurance because he may not need much health care, but at any given moment, said healthy 28-year-old could be hit by a drunk driver and spend the next year in a hospital recovering from nasty internal injuries and a traumatic head injury. That head injury could require a life-time of follow-up care or even a nursing home. Since the healthy 28-year-old had no health insurance, all of those bills are passed on to the hard-working tax payers.

Now then, if all healthy 28-year-olds are mandated to have coverage, the insurance companies will be better able to afford to pay for continuing care for the few that are rendered incapacitated by drunk drivers, cycling accidents, simple stupidity or what ever. That takes a huge chunk OUT of what tax payers pay.

It's easy to look at the legislation and see it as having a freedom taken away, but you can also look at it and see that this legislation attempts to free you of paying for millions of other people who don't have insurance - regardless of their health. Yes - you have to pay for insurance, but you have to pay property taxes and taxes that help to educate the next generation and keep roads drivable... it's all part of the big picture.

Where am I coming from on this? Six years ago I had a mortgage on a nice house, two kids and both myself and my husband worked. We had "great" health insurance. Then I got pregnant again, and much to our dismay our youngest was born 10 weeks early weighing only 2 lbs 7 oz. There were complications. The CO-PAYs alone reached 1/4 a million dollars! (Yeah - that was quite a bit more than the house we were living in was worth.)

We...
Lost...
Everything!

You know what we did? In our 30's we were forced to move across country and into my parent's basement. We had to live there about 4 months until my husband could find work in VA. I couldn't go back to work because I was playing full-time nurse to a child with a feeding tube (can't just throw a kid with wires and tubes into daycare).

The new health care law would have made it so that we could have kept our house, our jobs and not lose everything. Some people say, "Oh, well your situation is rare."
Guess what? No it's not! People have accidents every day. People are diagnosed with cancer every day. Premature babies are born every day... Huge medical bills are the #1 reason people go bankrupt... and all those unpaid bills???

Yup - all us hard-working tax-payers pay them!

So no - I'm not a fan of Obama, but I think it's important for people to educate themselves through reliable sources on legislation like this before decrying it.
You can't learn all about it from me, or from your friends, from what you read in FaceBook posts or even from partisan politicians. You need to get your information from non-partisan, factual sites.

No - it's not perfect, but it does have some good points.
 
Last edited:
If you stand before a court and say a red ball is blue does the court have to agree with you ?



old.gif
No they do not have to agree, but they shouldnt help change the color...that is not their job & that is the point!
 
Quote: If a cop is fishing for a possible crime that is an unreasonable search. If he has enough RAS to make it a reasonable search he has enough RAS to get a judge to sign a warrant...

The whole point of the 4th was to make a cop go to a judge to prove his case before a search.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."


Show me where is says unless you can train a dog to search for you or unless you stop everyone on that road...

If it needs to say that then thats why we have the power to amend the Constitution. This whole "its not what it says but we(SC) are adding an exemption" junk is not how it is suppose to work
 
Last edited:
Newbie here, just chiming in.

To start, I was raised a Republican, but over the last few years I've decided I'm pretty much center of the road - I'm tired of all the partisan back-biting. That said, there are a lot of misnomers about the health care law floating around - largely due to politicians twisting the truth to make things seem better or worse than what they are.

For those who are mad enough to leave the country over this, please remember that many other 1st world countries have government-run healthcare... Canada, England, much of Europe... so if you don't like this piece of legislation, do some research prior to packing up your house.

The cost of medical care for uninsured people (who can't afford to pay) is in the hundreds of millions each year. Through the trickle-down effect, that ends up swallowing up hundreds of millions in tax-payer dollars. Sure - it's easy to say a health 28-year-old should have the *freedom* to not have health insurance because he may not need much health care, but at any given moment, said healthy 28-year-old could be hit by a drunk driver and spend the next year in a hospital recovering from nasty internal injuries and a traumatic head injury. That head injury could require a life-time of follow-up care or even a nursing home. Since the healthy 28-year-old had no health insurance, all of those bills are passed on to the hard-working tax payers.

Now then, if all healthy 28-year-olds are mandated to have coverage, the insurance companies will be better able to afford to pay for continuing care for the few that are rendered incapacitated by drunk drivers, cycling accidents, simple stupidity or what ever. That takes a huge chunk OUT of what tax payers pay.

It's easy to look at the legislation and see it as having a freedom taken away, but you can also look at it and see that this legislation attempts to free you of paying for millions of other people who don't have insurance - regardless of their health. Yes - you have to pay for insurance, but you have to pay property taxes and taxes that help to educate the next generation and keep roads drivable... it's all part of the big picture.

Where am I coming from on this? Six years ago I had a mortgage on a nice house, two kids and both myself and my husband worked. We had "great" health insurance. Then I got pregnant again, and much to our dismay our youngest was born 10 weeks early weighing only 2 lbs 7 oz. There were complications. The CO-PAYs alone reached 1/4 a million dollars! (Yeah - that was quite a bit more than the house we were living in was worth.)

We...
Lost...
Everything!

You know what we did? In our 30's we were forced to move across country and into my parent's basement. We had to live there about 4 months until my husband could find work in VA. I couldn't go back to work because I was playing full-time nurse to a child with a feeding tube (can't just throw a kid with wires and tubes into daycare).

The new health care law would have made it so that we could have kept our house, our jobs and not lose everything. Some people say, "Oh, well your situation is rare."
Guess what? No it's not! People have accidents every day. People are diagnosed with cancer every day. Premature babies are born every day... Huge medical bills are the #1 reason people go bankrupt... and all those unpaid bills???

Yup - all us hard-working tax-payers pay them!

So no - I'm not a fan of Obama, but I think it's important for people to educate themselves through reliable sources on legislation like this before decrying it.
You can't learn all about it from me, or from your friends, from what you read in FaceBook posts or even from partisan politicians. You need to get your information from non-partisan, factual sites.

No - it's not perfect, but it does have some good points.
Finally, a rational take.

Mo
 
As I said before just because they say a red ball is blue should the court think it's blue ?



old.gif
Not that there's really any moral high ground in Washington, but presenting such an onerous bill to the people as one thing, in order to soothe the savage beast, and then switching everything after the fact, definitely doesn't give them the moral high ground in the upcoming election.

They know that they threw this thing in the face of a defiant majority, just to buy a the votes of a disadvantaged few.
 
First
welcome-byc.gif
From Hemet, Calif.
Newbie here, just chiming in.

To start, I was raised a Republican, but over the last few years I've decided I'm pretty much center of the road - I'm tired of all the partisan back-biting. That said, there are a lot of misnomers about the health care law floating around - largely due to politicians twisting the truth to make things seem better or worse than what they are.

For those who are mad enough to leave the country over this, please remember that many other 1st world countries have government-run healthcare... Canada, England, much of Europe... so if you don't like this piece of legislation, do some research prior to packing up your house.

The cost of medical care for uninsured people (who can't afford to pay) is in the hundreds of millions each year. Through the trickle-down effect, that ends up swallowing up hundreds of millions in tax-payer dollars. Sure - it's easy to say a health 28-year-old should have the *freedom* to not have health insurance because he may not need much health care, but at any given moment, said healthy 28-year-old could be hit by a drunk driver and spend the next year in a hospital recovering from nasty internal injuries and a traumatic head injury. That head injury could require a life-time of follow-up care or even a nursing home. Since the healthy 28-year-old had no health insurance, all of those bills are passed on to the hard-working tax payers.
This is why we should be able to buy just major medical it would be cheaper
Now then, if all healthy 28-year-olds are mandated to have coverage, the insurance companies will be better able to afford to pay for continuing care for the few that are rendered incapacitated by drunk drivers, cycling accidents, simple stupidity or what ever. That takes a huge chunk OUT of what tax payers pay.

It's easy to look at the legislation and see it as having a freedom taken away, but you can also look at it and see that this legislation attempts to free you of paying for millions of other people who don't have insurance - regardless of their health. Yes - you have to pay for insurance, but you have to pay property taxes and taxes that help to educate the next generation and keep roads drivable... it's all part of the big picture.

Where am I coming from on this? Six years ago I had a mortgage on a nice house, two kids and both myself and my husband worked. We had "great" health insurance. Then I got pregnant again, and much to our dismay our youngest was born 10 weeks early weighing only 2 lbs 7 oz. There were complications. The CO-PAYs alone reached 1/4 a million dollars! (Yeah - that was quite a bit more than the house we were living in was worth.)

We...
Lost...
Everything!

You know what we did? In our 30's we were forced to move across country and into my parent's basement. We had to live there about 4 months until my husband could find work in VA. I couldn't go back to work because I was playing full-time nurse to a child with a feeding tube (can't just throw a kid with wires and tubes into daycare).

The new health care law would have made it so that we could have kept our house, our jobs and not lose everything. Some people say, "Oh, well your situation is rare."
Guess what? No it's not! People have accidents every day. People are diagnosed with cancer every day. Premature babies are born every day... Huge medical bills are the #1 reason people go bankrupt... and all those unpaid bills???

Yup - all us hard-working tax-payers pay them!

So no - I'm not a fan of Obama, but I think it's important for people to educate themselves through reliable sources on legislation like this before decrying it.
You can't learn all about it from me, or from your friends, from what you read in FaceBook posts or even from partisan politicians. You need to get your information from non-partisan, factual sites.

No - it's not perfect, but it does have some good points.
I don't think there's anyone that said it was all bad. I think as a whole it's bad.



old.gif
 
Not that there's really any moral high ground in Washington, but presenting such an onerous bill to the people as one thing, in order to soothe the savage beast, and then switching everything after the fact, definitely doesn't give them the moral high ground in the upcoming election.

They know that they threw this thing in the face of a defiant majority, just to buy a the votes of a disadvantaged few.

True but the court had to rule if it was constitutional even if they said the ball was blue.




old.gif
 
Newbie here, just chiming in.

To start, I was raised a Republican, but over the last few years I've decided I'm pretty much center of the road - I'm tired of all the partisan back-biting. That said, there are a lot of misnomers about the health care law floating around - largely due to politicians twisting the truth to make things seem better or worse than what they are.

For those who are mad enough to leave the country over this, please remember that many other 1st world countries have government-run healthcare... Canada, England, much of Europe... so if you don't like this piece of legislation, do some research prior to packing up your house.

The cost of medical care for uninsured people (who can't afford to pay) is in the hundreds of millions each year. Through the trickle-down effect, that ends up swallowing up hundreds of millions in tax-payer dollars. Sure - it's easy to say a health 28-year-old should have the *freedom* to not have health insurance because he may not need much health care, but at any given moment, said healthy 28-year-old could be hit by a drunk driver and spend the next year in a hospital recovering from nasty internal injuries and a traumatic head injury. That head injury could require a life-time of follow-up care or even a nursing home. Since the healthy 28-year-old had no health insurance, all of those bills are passed on to the hard-working tax payers.

Now then, if all healthy 28-year-olds are mandated to have coverage, the insurance companies will be better able to afford to pay for continuing care for the few that are rendered incapacitated by drunk drivers, cycling accidents, simple stupidity or what ever. That takes a huge chunk OUT of what tax payers pay.

It's easy to look at the legislation and see it as having a freedom taken away, but you can also look at it and see that this legislation attempts to free you of paying for millions of other people who don't have insurance - regardless of their health. Yes - you have to pay for insurance, but you have to pay property taxes and taxes that help to educate the next generation and keep roads drivable... it's all part of the big picture.

Where am I coming from on this? Six years ago I had a mortgage on a nice house, two kids and both myself and my husband worked. We had "great" health insurance. Then I got pregnant again, and much to our dismay our youngest was born 10 weeks early weighing only 2 lbs 7 oz. There were complications. The CO-PAYs alone reached 1/4 a million dollars! (Yeah - that was quite a bit more than the house we were living in was worth.)

We...
Lost...
Everything!

You know what we did? In our 30's we were forced to move across country and into my parent's basement. We had to live there about 4 months until my husband could find work in VA. I couldn't go back to work because I was playing full-time nurse to a child with a feeding tube (can't just throw a kid with wires and tubes into daycare).

The new health care law would have made it so that we could have kept our house, our jobs and not lose everything. Some people say, "Oh, well your situation is rare."
Guess what? No it's not! People have accidents every day. People are diagnosed with cancer every day. Premature babies are born every day... Huge medical bills are the #1 reason people go bankrupt... and all those unpaid bills???

Yup - all us hard-working tax-payers pay them!

So no - I'm not a fan of Obama, but I think it's important for people to educate themselves through reliable sources on legislation like this before decrying it.
You can't learn all about it from me, or from your friends, from what you read in FaceBook posts or even from partisan politicians. You need to get your information from non-partisan, factual sites.

No - it's not perfect, but it does have some good points.
Here's the problem I see with the whole mandatory thing...As of right now, over 50% pay no federal income tax. Many millions get an earned income credit, at tax time....Basically, free money for being sexually irresponsible. It has become a lifestyle for some. How is the govt. going to extract any money from these bloodsuckers, when they are already doling out millions, just to create a voting constituancy? As I see it, they can only extract more from the already overburdened industious American, who is already giving until it hurts.
The problem with a level playing field in the world of finance is that nothing rolls in any direction.
 
If a cop is fishing for a possible crime that is an unreasonable search. If he has enough RAS to make it a reasonable search he has enough RAS to get a judge to sign a warrant...

The whole point of the 4th was to make a cop go to a judge to prove his case before a search.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."


Show me where is says unless you can train a dog to search for you or unless you stop everyone on that road...

If it needs to say that then thats why we have the power to amend the Constitution. This whole "its not what it says but we(SC) are adding an exemption" junk is not how it is suppose to work

Is a radar gun an unreasonable search ? And if it is then don't you think using them is in the general welfare to us them ?




old.gif
 
Finally, a rational take.

Mo


x2

It's most definitely imperfect, as ALL health care plans will be. You will always have to make an imperfect balance between the people covered, the quality of the care, or the cost savings. You can't really have all 3 to the umpteenth degree, at least not in any system so far. But we currently have one of the most expensive systems, many aren't covered, and our outcomes are poorer in many many ways.

I don't like the whole Act, but we desperately need to do something. Unfortunately the most effective fix would probably be a much more drastic change, and that's something that will never happen. We'll have messy half measures like this one that have been haggled over and twisted all around before being passed. It's very easy to say how evil it is until you're in the situation of losing everything through no fault of your own as above. And it's very easy as, say, a parent with a child that has a preexisting condition that's now covered to say it's fantastic unless you're the one losing out as ChicknThief looks to be. But I think some rational discourse is called for. Unfortunately there are many that aren't very aware of how healthcare dollars are generated and spent in the U.S., and how they correlate to health outcomes. We aren't doing that well here. It's going to rain down on our heads as the baby boomers continue to age and enter the Medicare system.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom