ACA Supreme Court Tuesday

[Danzig]

was watching msnbc this morning while doing my daily penance on the elliptical and treadmill...they said the obamacare bill is 2700 pages long, not a 1000. that's the eqivalent of reading war and peace, the pickwick papers, and les miserables...but would feel like you were trying to read james joyces ulysses if it was 2700 pages long. good god. no way those senators and congressmen read it.
they also said something interesting-that hillary clinton had the individual mandate in her plan, and obama was against it then. my how things change.

at any rate, people don't know what all is contained-but they know they don't like being forced to purchase something. the WH is arguing that everyone engages in the health care system, hence the commerce clause would apply...however, everyone doesn't engage in the system.
knowing people up to 400% of federal poverty levels would get subsidized, both for premium and for stop loss is enough to make you go huh? that rule would include most arkansas citizens. all but the very highest income in the top 1-2% of households. you guys want to subsidize 99% of this state?

the healthiest group of people-they're the ones obama is forcing companies to keep on their parents policies til age 26-how does that make sense?
medicaid is already bankrupting state budgets-how can they afford for that cost to double since the qualifying rules would change from 70% above poverty level to the new 120% of poverty level?


the only way to fix medical, and get everyone covered is single payer. all this convoluted bs is just that, bs. it fixes nothing. it is unaffordable. but the pols are too chicken to do what really needs doing.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

the only way to fix medical, and get everyone covered is single payer. all this convoluted bs is just that, bs. it fixes nothing. it is unaffordable. but the pols are too chicken to do what really needs doing.

The GOP had an uncooperative hissy fit on every single thing this president was trying to do from day one. So he compromised by going to a 100%, straight-GOP-health plan from the 1990's, that had already been proven to work, in practice, and lower insurance costs in Mass. There is nothing wrong with this plan. They added more consumer protections. Yet the GOP still had a hissy fit, over their own damn plan.

For goodness sakes: Paul Ryans current budget to destroy Medicare moves it from a government non-profit program, to a privatized for-profit voucher program that is an exact duplicate of the ACA! And he touts all the financial benefits.

The ACA a 100% GOP plan, proven to work in practice in Mass., yet the GOP still didn't put up one vote for it, because they are more concerned with sabotaging this president than helping the citizens of this country.

This was the best the citizens could get against the 100% obstruction of the GOP against this president. Health care is an economic issue, it's out of control here, it's driving this country to poverty. The president was absolutely right to address it.

This president addressed our health care disaster, like every single president, Republican or Democrat, since Johnson has tried to, and finally got something passed with not just a simple senate majority as it needed, but with 60 votes - a clear and overwhelming majority.

The current incarnation of the GOP is done as a political party. They will have an overwhelming disaster this fall, then the brahmins of the party will take back the reins from the John Birch Society/Tea Party/Evangelicals, and try to recover from 2016 on.

[horseofcourse]

the ACA is nothing really different than what exists other than forcing people to by something they can't afford. It needs to be eliminated. Health insurance companies need to be eliminated on the grounds of common human decency...maybe not eliminated completely, but a massive amount of it. It comes down to this question, should basic health care for a sick child be provided for in this country?? It's a simple yes or no question. If you don't like the ACA, you certainly don't like the present system I wouldn't think. As someone with kids I want everyone treated. If an illegal imigrant is walking around with a conageous disease, I want them treated, no questions asked. I really don't understand the concept of anyone wanting anyone sick just walking around. The ACA solves nothing whatsoever with problems with the way things are. The mandate is pretty ridiculous for the most part.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by horseofcourse

the ACA is nothing really different than what exists other than forcing people to by something they can't afford. It needs to be eliminated. Health insurance companies need to be eliminated on the grounds of common human decency...maybe not eliminated completely, but a massive amount of it. It comes down to this question, should basic health care for a sick child be provided for in this country?? It's a simple yes or no question. If you don't like the ACA, you certainly don't like the present system I wouldn't think. As someone with kids I want everyone treated. If an illegal imigrant is walking around with a conageous disease, I want them treated, no questions asked. I really don't understand the concept of anyone wanting anyone sick just walking around. The ACA solves nothing whatsoever with problems with the way things are. The mandate is pretty ridiculous for the most part.

no, it's different. it's a bad attempt at fixing a bad problem.

single payer. that's what's needed. not that it would ultimately end up a great system-but then everyone would be covered and it wouldn't be a convoluted crazy mess.

[horseofcourse]

Originally Posted by Danzig

no, it's different. it's a bad attempt at fixing a bad problem.

single payer. that's what's needed. not that it would ultimately end up a great system-but then everyone would be covered and it wouldn't be a convoluted crazy mess.

What's different other than a mandate forcing you to buy unbelievably expensive insurance you can't afford? The insurance companies are already there. I have caddilac insurance and still pay well over 5 thousand dollars out of pocket every single year for my family with co pays, deductibles etc. Granted, I have a pre-existing condition etc, so I will pay more. But even with a superb plan, it's breaking me...the costs.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by horseofcourse

What's different other than a mandate forcing you to buy unbelievably expensive insurance you can't afford? The insurance companies are already there. I have caddilac insurance and still pay well over 5 thousand dollars out of pocket every single year for my family with co pays, deductibles etc. Granted, I have a pre-existing condition etc, so I will pay more. But even with a superb plan, it's breaking me...the costs.

what's different is that those of us paying will continue to pay more and more...both in higher premiums and in higher taxes, since the way they're attempting to force people to buy coverage who can't afford to pay is by subsidizing their premiums- and their stop losses. essentially the govt has passed something that keeps insurance companies in business, assures them of a buying public, but does absolutely nothing to handle rising costs which is caused by a variety of factors. you've got a govt telling ins. cos they must add fringe benefits, take on all comers regardless of health-of course that will make those of us paying premiums see the prices explode.
ACA supposedly doesn't take effect til '14, but certain things are already occuring-including supposedly having the feds set aside money now for the bills that will start coming due in a couple years. yeah, cause they're so good at budgeting money.
the reason they won't even attempt single payer is because it would put a lot of folks out of work-there would be no bcbs anymore, or humana, united healthcare, etc. there wouldn't be a need for health ins. companies anymore. problem is, back when they should have done this, they didn't. now, you're trying to change this humongous mess which would have a lot of negative consequences...so they're trying to take what we have, and make it fit. it's not going to work. and what it all boils down to-how does the fed have the right to tell someone they must purchase a product-one that is really an intangible at that. you buy a car, you have a car. you see it, it's there, you can use it. when's the last time you washed your insurance policy? took it for a drive? read it even? it's there if you need it. because it's a different type of product, a promise of a service if there's a need, all the rules are different. the mindset is different.
would everyone be better off with coverage? yes. but how do you force it? there's only one way to actually, legally, constitutionally guarantee medical coverage for everyone. until it gets to where more need/want it than don't, there won't be a push.
but right now, most of the country is covered in some form or fashin. whether thru medicare, medicaid, buying on their own, or thru a group. but obama and congress are attempting to create this monstrosity that will essentially add coverage for some, while making changes that affect many-and for many affected, the change is negative.

[horseofcourse]

Originally Posted by Danzig

what's different is that those of us paying will continue to pay more and more...both in higher premiums and in higher taxes,

This has been happening for years and years without the ACA (paying more and more and more in premiums as well as co pays and deductables). I suppose you could argue the ACA will increase payments even more, but I think it's moot, it's already been happening pre-passage. And the bolded part is laughable...that ain't ever gonna happen again (there's them jobs to be created and all...can't ever raise them again!!). In essence it's simply what America is right now...choose evil or evil. That's what a national election is and that is what is the ACA or pre-ACA is. The high comedy of all this is that we have an economic neo-liberal right wing ultra-conservative president right now, and we have to try to out-conservative him in the republican primaries...it is extreme hilarity of the highest order. Right now Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan would be way, way too liberal to win a democratic primary. That is where we stand. Obama has taken what the Bush admin has done to the infinite order to where a sitting president has the right to execute any American they wish with no repurcussion whatsoever. None. Obama cut his deals with the health insurance companies and pharmacutical companies long before he was even elected. Single payer was not an option and never was and never will be, that this plan is defined by the "other side" as socialism is beyond laughable. People still can't understand that the two political parties are in complete synch with each other and 100 percent in collusion, it is all a complete act the "gridlock", there is no disagreement about anything....look at the votes on the military spending bills and NDAA, they go about 90-10 in Senate. They make up stuff for the reality television type entertainment as the contraception fight....really, and the fight over this health care reform which is nothing really, the system stays as is and has been forever. It's a pretty straight forward conservative solution, insurance mandates, from the 90s. So what one side wanted is now "socialism", and at the time what the other side wouldn't do now unanimously votes for it. That we have 24 hour news channels covering it just makes it simply circus clown stuff. Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, and whomever else has a big time stake in maintaining this fake "left and right" supreme divide as denoted by the "R and D" tribal gatherings. That does not exist at all any more and hasn't for quite some time. Some are starting to figure it out, but it will take a long, long time and by then it will likely be too late. We're suckers of the highest order.

Look at the NDAA votes. Look at the number of Goldman-Sachs stooges on Obama's staff, look at the military decisions of Obama, and compare them to Bush. There is zero divide people....zero. None. It's simply a game show. A president Santorum or President Romney, or President Bush, or President Clinton or President Obama. Same as it ever was.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by horseofcourse

What's different other than a mandate forcing you to buy unbelievably expensive insurance you can't afford? The insurance companies are already there. I have caddilac insurance and still pay well over 5 thousand dollars out of pocket every single year for my family with co pays, deductibles etc. Granted, I have a pre-existing condition etc, so I will pay more. But even with a superb plan, it's breaking me...the costs.

About $1,000 of your annual premium cost is paying for uninsured people.

The mandate, which will affect less than 7% of adults, helps lower that cost for you. In 2014, you'll be able to shop the exchanges for less expensive insurance (including that offered by non-profits), with zero concern about your pre-existing condition. You'll pay the same with a new policy as someone without your condition.

If you cannot afford insurance, there are tax credits that will help you afford it.

In addition, and luckily for you, the ACA has now made it illegal for an insurance company to drop you for claims on your existing conditions.

Yes, single payer would have been far more efficient, and cost alot less, but the GOP was stalling, so a GOP plan was chosen to get something passed. Hopefully, within 10 years, we'll have single payer. Either as a result of this country coming to it's senses about our excessive healthcare costs; or, in the rare situation the ACA is overturned, and Medicare being immediately extended to 40-50 million currently uninsured Americans.