Individual mandate shot down

Stupid Proles said:
yup whenever someone disagrees with you, it's because they've been lied to. People can't make up their own minds on things. If they agree with you, that means they were told the truth, not lied to by your side.
Click to expand...

Death panels. Government interference between doctor and patient. All the crazy nonsense about increased expenses when every survey shows countries with government medical pay at least 1/3 less than the US. Talk about poor quality of care when life expectancy is equal to or greater than in the US. What wasn't a lie?

Most US citizens do not know the intricacies of government medical. Why would they? It's natural they'd be cautious about change when hearing all the lies. The basic problem is comparing government medical to private medical insurance. Government medical does not operate the same way as private insurance. Because there aren't any individual plans that means the government does not get involved on an individual basis. That's the fundamental difference. However, some people try to confuse the issue by saying the government will replace ones insurance company implying doctors will have to consult with the government like they do with private insurers. That is a deliberate misrepresentation if not an outright lie. That's why once a country implements government medical the citizens insist the country keep that system. NO EXCEPTION.
 
Bijou said:
You can 'take it' any way you want or need to; it doesn't matter to me what you think of my definition. Single payer, universal health care where everyone is covered from cradle to grave is civilized. Obscenely rich pimps masquerading as 'insurance companies' and doctors living like emperors while millions go without basic care because they can't afford it is uncivilized.
Click to expand...
This. I've been so confused with the Senate proceedures, and the tax, passed as a mandate....think i missed the tree for the forest.I 'm reading thru the Byrd Rule of reconcilliation,,,what was i doing?

I should have looked for BIJOU, 'cuz i support SPay too, and she invited me here, so i know about the advantages. So I spent a day on a rant. wasted energy.
( I will miss my fee clinic - few patients, dedicated Dr,) and forgot about the purpose is to provide universal access.

Now that is is a tax, it enables further reform by Congressional purview to allow a P.O. vote, or Spay. Also it does limit the CClase to less then infinate.

I'll be the first to bash Obama over war, but however it got done -he did "get it done", and the nation will be better off for UC ijn the long run.

PS> Uh. I was wrong. :(
 
Last edited:
Superfreak said:
(Originally Posted by apple0154) They oppose it because of all the lies that have been told. As more and more people do research on government medical they'll realize the enormous benefit.
Click to expand...

LMAO... that is the biggest lie of them all.
Click to expand...

Not one country has reverted to a "pay or suffer" system. Not ONE. What more proof is needed?
 
annata said:
This. I've been so confused with the Senate proceedures, and the tax, passed as a mandate....think i missed the tree for the forest.I 'm reading thru the Byrd Rule of reconcilliation,,,what was i doing?

I should have looked for BIJOU, 'cuz i support SPay too, and she invited me here, so i know about the advantages. So I spent a day on a rant. wasted energy.
( I will miss my fee clinic - few patients, dedicated Dr,) and forgot about the purpose is to provide universal access.

Now that is is a tax, it enables further reform by Congressional purview to allow a P.O. vote, or Spay. Also it does limit the CClase to less then infinate.

I'll be the first to bash Obama over war, but however it got done -he did "get it done", and the nation will be better off for UC ijn the long run.

PS> Uh. I was wrong. :(
Click to expand...

This is so sweet of you, annata. Few of us like to admit when we're wrong, myself included. Congratulations for stepping up.

(When you write "Spay" I know you mean "single-pay" but my gut reaction is OMG my ovaries!)
 
Derp Derp said:
Not entirely correct Damo. All 5 justices who upheld the ACA agreed with Roberts that mandate provision was constitutional as a tax. Four of those justices agreed that it was constitutional under the CC from which Roberts dissented.
Click to expand...

If Obama gets to replace a conservative justice, there will be a pro-CC interpretation majority on the court.
 
cawacko said:
Simply because none of those countries are America.
Click to expand...

The citizens didn't want to revert. All those citizens....different nationalities, different beliefs, different cultures....they all realize government medical is superior because it is superior and once ObamaCare gets established the vast majority of US citizens will realize it's superior in spite of the lies. And as Annata notes in msg #182", "Now that is is a tax, it enables further reform by Congressional purview to allow a P.O. vote, or Spay."

You're on your way to full blown government medical. Congratulations!
 
apple0154 said:
The citizens didn't want to revert. All those citizens....different nationalities, different beliefs, different cultures....they all realize government medical is superior because it is superior and once ObamaCare gets established the vast majority of US citizens will realize it's superior in spite of the lies. And as Annata notes in msg #182", "Now that is is a tax, it enables further reform by Congressional purview to allow a P.O. vote, or Spay."

You're on your way to full blown government medical. Congratulations!
Click to expand...

The citizens? What the do you think I was talking about?

And yes I know everyone is going to love top down one size fits all government run health care when we get it just like the Canadians. We're so lucky!
 
cawacko said:
The citizens? What the do you think I was talking about?

And yes I know everyone is going to love top down one size fits all government run health care when we get it just like the Canadians. We're so lucky!
Click to expand...

Yes, you are. Not just like Canadians but also like Australians and British and French and Italians and Germans and Norwegians and the Swiss and.....

Civilized health care. Even Conservative Justice Roberts realized the need for ObamaCare and whether it's called a penalty or a tax or is or isn't under of the CC logic and common sense prevailed. Again, there is not one country that has reverted to a "pay or suffer" system after implementing a government plan. Not one exception. What more proof is needed?
 
apple0154 said:
Yes, you are. Not just like Canadians but also like Australians and British and French and Italians and Germans and Norwegians and the Swiss and.....

Civilized health care. Even Conservative Justice Roberts realized the need for ObamaCare and whether it's called a penalty or a tax or is or isn't under of the CC logic and common sense prevailed. Again, there is not one country that has reverted to a "pay or suffer" system after implementing a government plan. Not one exception. What more proof is needed?
Click to expand...

None of those countries are America.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
you mean proof that universal health care destroys the private system beyond recovery?.......agreed.....
Click to expand...

Nonsense and the proof of that is there are private interests in Canada scrambling to get their grubby hands on some of the medical cash. What better business to be in than having customers fighting for their life? The slightest hint a private clinic/doctor may be able to offer something better and the dying will spend their last penny.

A private system is not beyond recovery when its income is based on scamming the dying.
 
apple0154 said:
That's obvious. However, yesterday's court decision has opened the door to one payer/universal coverage.
Click to expand...
I was thinking a reversal by the SC would've done that.

However, at least we now have a foundation, that can be built upon as time goes by.

What we need, is a 'lobbyist free' solution.

As opposed to what we are starting with.
 
cawacko said:
The citizens? What the do you think I was talking about?

And yes I know everyone is going to love top down one size fits all government run health care when we get it just like the Canadians. We're so lucky!
Click to expand...
I don't think Apple is completely informed there Wacko.....to state the obvious niether are you. Most modern industrialized nations, well actually all of them except the US, have systems that are a combination of private/public sector health care. The misnomer here is that we don't have public health care in the US. Hell over 70% of Hospitals and Clinics are publicly owned and ran. What all modern industrialized nations have done is implemented three fundamental reforms that make access to primary health care affordable to all and regulates health care so that the gods of Wall Street can't hold your health and financial well being hostage to their unlimited greed for profits.

Whether you like it or not the current pay or suffer system is unsustainable economically as it rapidly approaches 20% of GDP. That will change. What is aggravating to me is that the Republican resistance to health care reform is purely politically driven. The individual mandate concept is a Republican market driven concept that still prioritizes the financial idustries profits over the peoples best interest. It was agreed to as a compromize over a public option for health insurance.

Anyways this argument that all modern nations or that our system will become like Canada's or the UK's is grossly uninformed. All modern nations, except the US, have regulated health care so that #1. All people are covered to some extent. #2. The financial sector cannot prophet on others misfortune and #3. The health care industry cannot exploit the sick and injured by charging whatever they want to maximize their profits.

That's not "Government Run Health Care" and it's not what's being suggested for our country.

Instead of consuming the right wing propaganda about health care reform and their scare tactics of nationalization I'd suggest you actually become informed and research how such bastions of socialism as Switzerland, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan and Germany manage their health care systems. None of those nations have socialized health care in the UK/Canadian mold yet all of them have implemented the three basic fundamental reforms I described over 30 years ago and not one of those nations have gone back to de-regulaed market driven system as we have or had and all of those nations have lower health care cost than the US, as a percentage of GDP, they all have far greater access to primary care and they all have far greather health care outcomes than the US does. That means they are doing something right and we would be wise to consider implementing these fundamental reforms ourselves.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
you mean proof that universal health care destroys the private system beyond recovery?.......agreed.....
Click to expand...
What private system? The over whelming majority of our health care systems was all ready publicly owned. Over 70% of Hospitals and clinics are publically owned and have been for a very long time. It's only a the health care financial services (i.e. insurance) that are predominantly private sector in this nation and their lust for profits have made health care, particularly primary health care unaffordable for all but the very affluent. Where you're grossly uninformed is that most nations still use the private sector financial industry to finance health care in their nations. They are just required to operate as Non-Profits under the pretty understandable notion that no business should profit off the misfortune of others. What's truly ironic is the ACA doesn't require health insurance companies to operate as Non-Profits. It still permits them to operate at a quite generous 15% margin. The fact that prior to ACA that health insurance companies were operating at substantially higher margins should, to any ration thinking person, tell you what the source of the problem is/was. Anyways the fact that the ACA limits Health Insurance Companies to a 15% margin on profits and senior management compensation completely debunks your asinne comment as the private system will just hum along swimmingly at 15% margins (which, FYI, is significantly higher profits than most publicly traded companies earn).

So study up and become iformed on this issues instead of parroting complete and absolute nonsense and quite being a thoughtless partisan drone.
 
apple0154 said:
Nonsense and the proof of that is there are private interests in Canada scrambling to get their grubby hands on some of the medical cash. What better business to be in than having customers fighting for their life? The slightest hint a private clinic/doctor may be able to offer something better and the dying will spend their last penny.

A private system is not beyond recovery when its income is based on scamming the dying.
Click to expand...

could a company in Canada step up and create a BC/BS from scratch to compete with the government system?......
 
Derp Derp said:
What private system? The over whelming majority of our health care systems was all ready publicly owned. Over 70% of Hospitals and clinics are publically owned and have been for a very long time. It's only a the health care financial services (i.e. insurance) that are predominantly private sector in this nation and their lust for profits have made health care, particularly primary health care unaffordable for all but the very affluent. Where you're grossly uninformed is that most nations still use the private sector financial industry to finance health care in their nations. They are just required to operate as Non-Profits under the pretty understandable notion that no business should profit off the misfortune of others. What's truly ironic is the ACA doesn't require health insurance companies to operate as Non-Profits. It still permits them to operate at a quite generous 15% margin. The fact that prior to ACA that health insurance companies were operating at substantially higher margins should, to any ration thinking person, tell you what the source of the problem is/was. Anyways the fact that the ACA limits Health Insurance Companies to a 15% margin on profits and senior management compensation completely debunks your asinne comment as the private system will just hum along swimmingly at 15% margins (which, FYI, is significantly higher profits than most publicly traded companies earn).

So study up and become iformed on this issues instead of parroting complete and absolute nonsense and quite being a thoughtless partisan drone.
Click to expand...

dude....come back when youknow the difference between publicly owned and government owned......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top