What if Obamacare is voted down by the Supreme Court?

leaningright said:
Here are some things that I do know, from a personal viewpoint. I know that had I been "forced" to pay for insurance the first 15 years of my working life as a teacher, I would not be where I am now. I know I would not have the house that will be paid for in a couple of years, I know I would have been much more limited on the activities and interests I have pursued, I know that I would have felt that I couldn't have afforded to get married and have children at 35, which was cutting it close as it is. I chose not to buy insurance until I was 37 all from a financial standpoint and what would be best for me financially during the time I started working a real job when I was 21. I worry about something being "mandated" and I shudder to think of where I'd be if it were mandated back in 1987 when I started working.

I am all for some sort of health care system and am all for eliminating rejection because of "pre-existing conditions." I don't know if the solution is going to have to come from a re-working of the medicare/medicaid part of what currently exists or where it is going to have to come from I just know that I am in favor of it. I really don't think I have ever seen anyone who needed care who wasn't cared for. I have seen the cost of prolonged illness decimate families financially. This is another of those hard problems that needs to be dealt with. It seems the democrats at least have tried to deal with the problem, even if in such a haphazard manner that it is probably going to have to be re-vamped. For the record, I think the madate portion will get shot down by the SC and I also think that will destroy how the law would work....and then back to the drawing board. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...
I don't think you undersrtand what the impact of a universal mandate would be. By bringing 30 to 50 more million into the system you'll substantially lower the cost of health insurance for everyone so that you'd be paying 40% to 60% less and getting superior coverage. Particularly for primary care and prevention which will help bring cost down even further.
 
Derp Derp said:
Math isn't your thing is it Tinkerbell? Holy shit, having everyone sharing the cost of health care by paying insurance would substantially reduce cost for everyone. What an incredibly stupid thing to say! LOL
Click to expand...

But everyone isn't going to be SHARINHG the costs.
Those who have are going to end up paying not only for themselves; but for others.

How soon before you have to not only pay for your own house; but for the house of your neighbor?
 
Derp Derp said:
I don't think you undersrtand what the impact of a universal mandate would be. By bringing 30 to 50 more million into the system you'll substantially lower the cost of health insurance for everyone so that you'd be paying 40% to 60% less and getting superior coverage. Particularly for primary care and prevention which will help bring cost down even further.
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO... are you ever going to back up your statistics with links to such?

By adding 30-50 million people (increasing demand) you are going to raise costs by 7000%. See, I can make outlandish claims too.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
But everyone isn't going to be SHARINHG the costs.
Those who have are going to end up paying not only for themselves; but for others.

How soon before you have to not only pay for your own house; but for the house of your neighbor?
Click to expand...


You already do that if your neighbor has a mortgage. Renters and people who own their homes outright subsidize home ownership of mortgagors. And that doesn't even get into other government home ownership programs. What's next? Childless people paying for the education of people with kids?

Basically, you are arguing against any form of social insurance or general government taxation to confer benefits on any subset of the population.
 
Rana said:
Are you sure, mandates would mean everyone would have insurance and doctors and hospitals would not have to write off bad debt which would mean they do not have to pass the debt on to those who pay which translates into lower costs.
Click to expand...

Where do you think the money is going to come from to pay the costs of those who aren't paying now?
 
Superfreak said:
What is good for society as a whole is for us to end the obesity in this country. Should the government mandate the number of government approved exercise classes we take each week? Should they ban all McDonalds, Coca Cola, Pepsi, Fried foods, candy, cookies etc... that only harm an individuals health?
Click to expand...

What's good for society reminds me of the Escape From LA movie where The President declares that anyone not conforming to the new "Moral America" laws he creates (banning such things as tobacco, alcoholic beverages, red meat, firearms, profanity, non-Christian religions, atheism and non-marital sex) will be deported to Los Angeles Island or choose death by electrocution as an alternative.
 
Derp Derp said:
I don't think you undersrtand what the impact of a universal mandate would be. By bringing 30 to 50 more million into the system you'll substantially lower the cost of health insurance for everyone so that you'd be paying 40% to 60% less and getting superior coverage. Particularly for primary care and prevention which will help bring cost down even further.
Click to expand...

And how does bringing in 30 million, who apparently aren't able to afford it now, lower the cost for everyone else?
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
You already do that if your neighbor has a mortgage. Renters and people who own their homes outright subsidize home ownership of mortgagors. And that doesn't even get into other government home ownership programs. What's next? Childless people paying for the education of people with kids?

Basically, you are arguing against any form of social insurance or general government taxation to confer benefits on any subset of the population.
Click to expand...

I never said your neighbor has a mortgage, that was you attempting to minimize the question.
 
Derp Derp said:
I don't think you undersrtand what the impact of a universal mandate would be. By bringing 30 to 50 more million into the system you'll substantially lower the cost of health insurance for everyone so that you'd be paying 40% to 60% less and getting superior coverage. Particularly for primary care and prevention which will help bring cost down even further.
Click to expand...

no, you won't. you'll be lining the pockets of all the insurance companies and their stock holders. If you think that this huge influx of cash is going to make insurance companies lower their costs, you need some mental help.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
no, you won't. you'll be lining the pockets of all the insurance companies and their stock holders. If you think that this huge influx of cash is going to make insurance companies lower their costs, you need some mental help.
Click to expand...


Except that insurance companies are required to use 80% of all premium payments for medical benefits and cannot have administrative costs in excess of 20%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top