Quick question to those against what you call Obamacare?
- screamingposted 12 years ago
0If you found yourself with no insurance, unable to afford private insurance, and (you, your spouse, your children, your parents, or your grandkids) were in need of medical treatment. Would you be against Obamacare?
I have no insurance, am unable to afford private insurance and both my spouse and I are in need of medical treatment.
I neither demand nor expect, nor do I want, someone else to take care of my needs. If I can't do it myself, so be it.
So yes, I am against Obamacare - it is nothing more than welfare for those wanting health care but won't or can't afford it. This country does not need an expanded welfare system.You need to research a bit more. Under the plan all will pay in something. And I'm sorry to hear you and your spouse put death over a possible treatment for yourselves and possibly loved ones in the future.
Yes, all would pay something. In my financial condition I might pay 10% of the actual cost. Someone else is then required to pick up the rest of it, most likely against their will.
I would expect that, just like taxes, half the country would be required to pay for free medical care for the other half. That is, to me, unacceptable.We are all gonna be paying a lot more than that. It's Not Paid For: The CBO says the current House plan would increase the deficit by $239 billion over 10 years. And that number will likely continue to rise over the long term. Similar entitlement bills in the past, including Medicare, have scored much lower than their actual eventual cost. A new study released by the Peterson Foundation estimates the House bill would add $1 trillion to the deficit in the second decade.
That's OK though, we will just print more money!! YAY!
Fascinating. Who do you think will pick up the cost if you or your spouse or both become disabled or end up in need of hospice care?
Do you expect those around you to let you die if you don't have the money?
Incredibly cruel.Pretty, I have accepted no charity in my 62 years of life; rather I have given it.
I have no intention of accepting any now, particularly charity that is forced upon those that don't want to give it. If I cannot afford something I don't get to have it. It's called taking care of and supporting ones self - something this country seems have forgotten how to do.Sorry, I do not see you as noble; I see you as deluded and sad.
Deluded? Sad? Understanding that no man is an island, and that most will have hard times at some point, do you not believe that people can and do provide for themselves? Do you not understand that pride that goes with supporting yourself without demanding charity from someone else?
Or have you fallen into the deadly trap of believing that America owes you a living from cradle to grave, that there is no reason to put food on your own table (or buy your own health care)? Do you find pride in working the American system so that it, not you, provides for your daily needs? Are you contemptuous of our ancestors of a century ago that raised a family by hard work rather than government charity?
If so there really is delusion and sadness.Are you a Christian? If so, you don't care about your fellow man? You'd rather let a person die then make sure everyone has the ability to purchase health insurance? Just curious.
This is the crux of the issue for me, according to the harvard study on the matter the Obamacare measure will save 45 000 lives yearly, if you are willing to let them die to save you some tax dollars be it on your conscience, I will be paying it happily.
http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/ … hs-a-year/No, I'm not big on mythology, although I do contribute to charities and help out with cash and labor where I can. What does being a Christian have to do with anything? Do you honestly think that people believing in ancient stories and fables are the only ones that care?
The point is twofold:
1. America cannot give everyone the ability to purchase health insurance without going bankrupt. At least not with the level of care we have come to expect and demand and without stopping other forms of charity (such as food, or housing).
2. Whatever I think about letting someone die because of lack of health care I do not have the right to take from anyone else to provide care for a 3rd person (or for myself or loved ones). It is not mine to take or dispense.
What is about Christians that they believe they have an innate right to pocketbooks everywhere? It is not yours: keep your hands off of it. Contribute voluntarily, as I do, but stay out of your neighbors pocketbook.
Chances are high that you will eventually get old and sick. Your spouse, if he/she is still alive, will have to seek medical care for you, and since you don't have insurance and have not sought medical attention when you need it, it will end up costing a bundle. The costs will be borne by others, whether or not you personally want it to happen. You know this, I am sure. Yet, you continue to delude yourself that you are somehow more noble for pretending that you will never accept help.
That is what I mean by sad and deluded.
As for the rest of your ridiculous questions, just because I support our government spending money on the health of its citizens does not mean that I myself do not work hard and am supported by the government. I live on a farm, grow much of my own food, including meat, work two jobs and own my own business. Your assumptions about me are as ridiculous as your belief that you are somehow more noble just because you make the naive and deluded choice to die instead of seek medical care that would save your life. Naive, because when the time comes you will undoubtedly not have much of a choice, and deluded, because you think you are somehow special.Assumptions about you? I asked about your belief and attitude concerning self support to find out - not to make assumptions. If you took it that way I'm sorry, but any assumptions you think I might have made were certainly no more offensive than the ones you are clearly proclaiming about me.
Another question, though. I could, by severely limiting my expenditures, buy insurance. Sell both cars and walk or bicycle to grocery stores. Without transportation there is no way and no need to ever leave my neighborhood - all entertainment is gone. Cancel satellite TV. Cancel two cell phones and get a land line again. No eating out or movies, no taking grandkids to the park. No gift purchases for children or grandchildren. No visiting siblings in nearby cities. No camping trips (our only real travel). Keep the internet as HP more than pays for it, but other than that sit at home and vegetate, watching reruns of "I Love Lucy" on local channels..
That will likely give me enough $$ to buy insurance.
Now. The money that you will contribute to my Obamacare insurance is actually buying unnecessary luxuries - are you still willing to buy my insurance? Simply because I wish to spend limited funds elsewhere? I prefer to have an enjoyable, happy life rather than insurance - will YOU buy the insurance for me? Because the "luxuries" I would have to give up will certainly be allowed by govt. when setting the cost for my insurance and then there is nothing left."I prefer to have an enjoyable, happy life rather than insurance - will YOU buy the insurance for me?"
Here is the difference between your thinking and mine. I want all people in this wealthy country of ours to be able to have an enjoyable, happy life without worry about whether or not they can afford to pay a doctor to continue living it. We have plenty of money. Our priorities are screwed up. The money we spend on defense is shameful and should be redirected.
But, short answer to your question is, YES, I have no problem contributing to a system of universal health care that would allow you to keep your little luxuries. No problem at all.That may be our biggest disagreement - I do not believe that the country as a whole can afford this. We cannot continue to live and buy our luxuries on the backs of our children and grandchildren - eventually the bill will come due. We see a hint of this in the south as doctors and hospitals vacate and close down where we provide unlimited health care for citizens of other countries. Neither of these have unlimited funds, either, and the end result is that no one is covered if we spend too much trying to care for everyone.
Until we can learn to live within our means as a country we have no business spending for anything not directly related to the survival of the country. Country, not individual. Our govt. is tasked with maintaining the country, not baby sitting each and every citizen and buying them whatever they want with funding from future generations.
Certainly there are vast savings to be made in our spending - we don't need to provide cell phones for the poor, we don't need to spend for earmarks to make our politicians look good for their constituents, we don't need to give food stamps to half the nation.
The money we spend on defense should probably not be cut, but the money we spend on policing the world is shameful and should be cut. We do need a strong defense in this day and time.
When our govt. can learn some fiscal control in how to handle the money we give them to spend I might change my mind, although I am not a believer in socialist methods of spreading the wealth, taking from one to give to another in the name of charity or of doing what is "right"
Until that time, however, the funding for this grandiose scheme just isn't there no matter how much we want to help our neighbors.'I am not a believer in socialist methods of spreading the wealth, taking from one to give to another in the name of charity or of doing what is "right." '
Here is the problem I have with your stance on this issue. You and Sparkling Jewel proudly boast that you pay for your own health care and don’t expect others to contribute, while simultaneously being unwilling to contribute to the cost of a system that would provide health care for all, including yourselves. The irony is that, because you don’t have insurance, if something catastrophic happens to either of you, your care WILL be paid for by others, whether you wish it to or not. So, you get to have your little luxuries because you refuse to pay for health insurance (which, by the way, will be more affordable under the ACA) AND you get to sponge off the system if something happens to your health. All this, while begrudging any money spent to take care of the health of others. You don’t see the hypocrisy in that?
As for government spending, I wholeheartedly agree that we have to cut something. We just disagree on what needs to be cut. Our bloated defense budget could easily be cut in half and we would be fine.Yes,but..............
Everyone will not be participating in the Health Care thingy right?
All three branches of government are "exempt". I wonder what that is all about? Why would you be exempt from such a wonderful thing. Many unions, too, are exempt. Do they not want to have health care?
Does that mean they will sponge off of all of us?
How many others are exempt?
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct= … anpW3V0T0w
Well we know from this that something like 1200 companies have waivers. Why would you do that to your employees?Ahh the ignorance, I guess it never occurred to you to actually read the bill huh, the waivers simply mean that some companies, some parts of government and some unions can keep their health care until 2014 because the healthcare they offer is better than the one Obamacare offers until 2014 when no limit insurance is phased in or because the companies/unions claim to need time to change waivers were given to almost everyone who applied for them. Furthermore it only applies to insurance limits not any other part of Obamacare.
Go read the thing.
here is an outline of that particular issue.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter … ossroads-/I am weary of countering the misinformed. I see Josak took a shot at it, only for you to come back parroting more BS.
So let me ask you what I have asked others....perhaps you will actually answer instead of doing like Harry Reid and reading anecdotes about people without coverage.
Why could we not have passed a bill to simply cover the uncovered instead of a blanket....and they want you to know now it is a LAW...that is sociological in nature and brings in the IRS?
Hm?The answer to your question has been provided over and over and over again, on television, on the internet, on the radio, in newspapers, in magazines, in these forums, EVERYWHERE.
Try to figure it out.Nope...I ain't gonna let you do that.
Do you not have an answer? And no they haven't provided an answer to that which went past"Well you have to pass it before we know what's in it".
You will accept THAT piece of absurdity but you cannot tell me why we had to chain an entire nation to this. Oh except for the chosen few. The upper class.You do realise everyone is involved right? There is no upper class escape clause?
The reason Mitt Romney enacted the individual mandate in his pioneering health care law, which is what the ACA is based on, is so that insurance companies won't go broke providing coverage for people who previously were uninsurable due to pre-existing conditions and other ailments that cost a lot of money to treat.
That is it. Have you honestly not heard that before? Do you not understand it?
If insurance coverage is not required, then people who are currently healthy will not choose to enroll, thinking they don't need it. Only sick people will enroll, which would put an undue burden on insurance companies required to provide care for them.Can you blame her? I gave you an extensive legal answer to your last question about unions and government avoiding the plan and you replied with essentially "I bet they don't" it's not worth it if you re just going to ignore the law and the answers and make vague insinuations which are already incorrect.
You are far too trusting. It is illogical to enact a law like this for the needs of the fewer of the population. It would also be easier to get folks to go along with. Obviously the going along with part was moot to them as long as you could get to this point and have the privilege of calling those who disagree "sponges"
READ THE LAW. Unlimited coverage for people with insurance, extension of son and daughter coverage, increased monitoring of insurance care rejections (cause tens of thousands of deaths yearly) etc. etc.
But why EVERYONE? Why not just cover the covered. And no I am not leaving here to read for a week. You have no answers yourself?
Everyone because the law needs to be funded, most everyone's care will be improved anyway, for example very very few people have unlimited insurance coverage by 2014 everyone will. I read the law so can you otherwise you are arguing from ignorance. The law might be long but most of it is fluff one can easily identify and skim, as a voter don't you have a responsibility to educate yourself?
Well Josak, I blame the administration for that. Their manner of wanting to obfuscate information breeds distrust of the content, intent, and supposed result.
When someone who upholds the thing as wonderful and fantastic pulls that you have to pass it to know what's in it crap and another acts astonished that HE was supposed to read the bill??????????????????
If he won't why should I? Another little bit of non-logic we are just supposed to ignore. But no I am supposed to go away and do so like homework whener one of my progressive masters instructs me to.
A little unreasonable don't you think?
As I said earlier I skimmed the obviously pointless parts but yeah.
Wow. How long did it take you to read that? You must have a lot of free time! I'm not trying to be a smart alec either with that remark it's just that you are the first person I've heard of that has actually read it.
It only took a couple of evenings, once you skip out the introductions and fluff it's not actually any longer than a decent size novel, I read books all the time for pleasure and to learn, it seems to me that it's our duty as voters to know what is happening so we can make an informed vote so it did not seem like much of a sacrifice.
"We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it” Nancy Pelosi
Exactly..
Also"All these members keep coming up to me say Read The Bill! I don't have time to read the bill". John Conyers.
But we are supposed to know it like the Bible because we are now under it. They aren't but we are.You are both just making excuses for being too lazy or disinterested to read the bill before you make a decision, others did something wrong so now you are too? Excellent logic! Some of the criticisms you made were covered in the bill precisely and some of the things you complained about where not even in there, you have no idea what you are talking about and you are defending remaining in ignorance.
Wait a minute!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's ok for the lawmakers to be lazy and irresponsible but I must toe the line right?
Are you listening to yourself Josak?You show me where I said I thought it was ok for them to do it, you can't because I did not, it was bad, as i said in my comment they did it so now you are going to do it too? that is your idea of a good moral strategy? When you talk about Obamacare you don't know what you are talking about, until you do everything you say on the matter is worthless and you don't have the information to make a judgement and have an opinion that is valid.
Ok Josak I will go off and wade through 1200 pages.
You wouldn't either if I demanded it so stop thinking you are linking yourself with the saviors of the world when they are politicians no better than the republicans. It's not health care...it's economic and personal control.They are not the saviors of the world they are just politicians it just so happens that they are making a good call here. As for me I read the bill and you won't find me whining about one that I haven't, since you know nothing about it you really don't have any grounds to oppose it.
Watch it with me Josak. I put a quote from your girl, that is not me making an excuse, that is me posting A QUOTE!!
Where is my excuse? I put up a quote and you come back with that?? Ok buddy, ok.Ok, I appreciate the apology and you being honest about it. That is something you do not see on here very often (or life in general) and I value that in a person. All good.
What about your spouse? You don't care whether she gets medical care, either?
Do you expect me to say I don't care? Or that it is OK to force someone else to buy her insurance but not mine? Don't be foolish.
Somewhere in all the rhetoric the fact that strangers are going to be forced, under law, to provide insurance for those that can't or won't buy it themselves. What is it with the liberal mindset that is always so willing to dig into the wallets of everyone they see? Do they not care that what they find there is not theirs to take?The fight is over the increase in capital gain to the rich in that bill. Follow the money, And I can't imagine any Christian putting "money" before saving a "life!"
wilderness,
But that is exactly what is happening now. Strangers pay for the health care of those who can't or won't buy health care on their own. If I have insurance I'm paying a higher premium to help cover those who get so-called "charity care." ACA reduces the number of freeloaders on the healthcare system.
JSChams,
No. It IS about healthcare. ACA has been a huge wakeup call.
The ball has already been picked up at the state and regional level.
Many states have already started putting in place their health care exchanges. High risk pools for preexisting conditions citizens (e.g., those who cannot currently get insurance) are already in place.
Healthcare delivery system stakeholders have been preparing for ACA and getting ready for its impact.
Here in CA the determination was/is to move forward with necessary changes whether or not ACA goes through.
The bill has been and will continue to be a huge catalyst to deliver healthcare better. Which America sorely needs.
hese healthcare changes MUST be made.Really? And how exactly does it do that?
Actually, that's what you're told to think it's about. Government looking for your sympathy by showing you that plenty of people are without it and cooking up a system to fix the problem.
But, government doesn't FIX things. It makes them worse.
That IS the wake up call citizens should be getting NOW!I'm not getting my information from the government.
I'm getting my information from a CA consortium of stakeholders, including nonprofit foundations, community clinic and hospital directors, doctors, community members and others who are on the frontlines of how ACA will impact citizens and the safety net that currently provides care.
They are not looking to the government to fix the problem. They are looking at ACA as a catalyst to take the action they know needs to be taken.
ACA does provide some incentives to care deliverers to build capacity.
But no one here wants to talk about any of that. No one wants to talk about the good that it will do for currently uninsuerd people. NO one wants to talk about anything except that Obamacare is a "TAX" and it somehow offends people's personal responsibility and liberty.Who do we have responsibility to? Ourselves, our children, friends, family? Who all would you like each of us to be responsible for? What if I only make enough in my job to pay for my own family? Who decides how much is enough to take care of my own family before paying higher taxes to pay for others? Do you make enough to pay for your needs and another’s? If so, maybe you should donate more money to charity, or send a donation to the IRS.
Cagsil...right you are my friend. Is half the country really this drunk on the lies they gleefully nuzzle from the tyranny of our government? What would the constitution and the first 28 amendments look like if our founders had another go at it? ~If a people expect to be ignorant- and free- in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be ~Jefferson
We have a different system over here in Australia - no-one is forced to buy health insurance but we are compelled to pay a 'medicare levy' so everyone is able to receive medical treatment when needed. There are good arguments to be made that universal healthcare benefits the whole society, not just those who need it. Here's a few:
*Untreated infectious disease poses a potential threat for the wider society.
*Lack of medical treatment affects the labour force negatively
*Those who pay now may one day need to be propped up themselves.
*Universal healthcare is cheaper for the society as a whole.
Everyone talks about healthcare as though doctors want to heal you. That is not the objective. The objective is to exploit. Read "Racketerring in Medicine." You can purchase it on Amazon.com. What I feel sorry for are for those who think otherwise. If you want to get good medical care, go on-line with China. They may kill their babies but they care about healing. They have a great pride in it. Our doctors are great at keeping alive a person with catastrophic care (like a bullet in the head) but when it comes to systemic disease, all patients are nothing but a moneyball. I say stop screwing. They exploit that the most since most STDs mimick other diseases. This is where we're headed. To all the liberals who hate Christians, you might be surprised to know that the Christianity is the only religion that believes in healing unconditionally. So, now that we're past that - well - you got to live like a saint unless you vote for Romney. Why? Even God permits a "season of sin." But with liberals (and I mean the ones on top, not the lower tier of liberals who are hoodwinked), they will make you moral whether you like it or not. God hates them. Do you catch my drift?
Much respect is due to your outlook. If you do need help there is no shame in seeking it out. You can use the system to help you through some tough times without abusing it like so many. That is what it was ment for. I just said a prayer for your family, and hope it reaches you with renewed hope for a brighter day.
I respect you and your principles. I don't necessarily have the same outlook as you, but I understand what you're saying. I see you're getting a lot of flak from people who don't understand, so I wanted to say something supportive.
Huh, someone asks a question, wilderness answers it, and now (some) people jump down wilderness' throat. Real nice.
Hi Chris. I suspect you are referring to me. I don't feel even a tiny bit bad about jumping all over wilderness and his ilk. Their inconsistency is mind-boggling and it is hurting other people, and yet they seem to think they are "responsible" while those who accept help from the government when they need it are not.
Behold certain conservatives in this thread:
"I am responsible for my own self, not like those 'children' who want the government to take care of them."
"Yeah, I need medical attention, but I can't afford it, and I don't expect anyone else to pay for it."
"No, I don't want to contribute to a system that would help give everyone access to affordable health care. That would be tyranny. Why should I pay to help someone else be well?"
"Yeah, if I get hit by a bus and am critically injured, or survive a massive heart attack and receive unlimited medical care, I know the hospital will take care of me even if I don't have insurance or enough money to pay for my own medical care."
"Oh, you say other people would be footing the bill for my irresponsibility in the form of higher medical costs?"
[.....crickets.....]
No, I would not. There are people who need health care but either unable to pay for it and/or are uninsured for one reason or another. These people should not be refused quality health care because they have no type of insurance nor funds. That would be totally inhumane and egregious to say the least.
I would get the treatment and worry about it later. You can do that you know.
yes. first and foremost, it is unconstitutional,the supreme court and the federal government have no constitutional authority to make me buy their healthcare products and try to run my healthcare lifestyle.
I have no insurance and raised four children as a single parent without it. the system, the free market (to what degree it has been, but could be even better) allowed that. Charitable organizations/hospitals paying for excellent healthcare helped us when it was needed and we lived a healthy prevent illness lifestyle to maintain sound mind, body and spirit. I continue to be healthy, pay out of pocket for most things I need, pay my bills and give back to others to balance the karmic books
All I need is my hard-earned money and savings and a freer market healthcare system and economy... that will keep costs down.Charitable organization/ hospiitals paying? Don't you realize your medical needs were paid by the people who have insurance and/or the federal government?
People give money to a charity voluntarily. The government is not a charity. Big difference.
Yes, but a lot of people are too proud to accept charity. They figure if it's a government program that they either have paid into or will when they can it's not charity.
Typical. You are leeching off the system and don't even recognize it, yet you would deny others.
Typical.read my other posts on these issues before you judge...you are the leech, not me!
I respectfully disagree. I pay at least a portion of my health insurance premium and the rest is part of my compensation package for being an excellent employee. If I get sick, after paying my deductible, my conscience can rest easy that I have earned the payment for my health care. Because I work for a living, two jobs and my own business by the way, I don't have to seek out charity or ask the hospital to pay my bills.
Yet, I recognize that there are those who are not so fortunate, and I am perfectly happy to give a large chunk of my hard-earned money to know that my friends, neighbors, and utter strangers do not have to worry about losing their homes to pay a catastrophic medical bill, or putting off seeing a doctor due to lack of money.
A coworker of mine just posted on his Facebook page about losing his 6-month-old brother because his teenage parents were turned away by their doctor for owing too much money, so they waited to see if their baby would get better, and when he didn't they went to the emergency room, but it was too late. This happened 40 years ago, but it still happens today. What is wrong with our people that so many of you are okay with this happening.
And the most incredible thing of all is that it would SAVE MONEY in the long run if everyone could see a doctor when they need to and not put it off until they are so sick that they have no choice. Yet, so-called conservatives are okay with their friends and neighbors suffering so they can save a few bucks.
It sickens me.If you truly think Obamacare is going to save the country money you desperately need to take one giant step into reality.
Even the government (notoriously stupid about underestimating costs) is coming to understand that the cost of this boondoggle is going to be vastly higher than projected. Obama's card trick of paying for 10 years to get 5 years of insurance at little more than we now pay has come to be common knowledge and we understand better what actual costs will be. Bearing in mind, of course, that even those huge estimates are still done by govt. and the cost will double again if past history of their expertise is any guide.Well, I guess Illegal's won't have to pay a dime for ObamaCare since they don't file taxes at the end of the year (cause there here illegally). They can cross the border, get free medical care, then go back home healthy as an ox! Better yet, they can all stay here, laugh at all the people who waited years to get into America the legal way ( like my great great grandparents), and go to college (just look up the DREAM Act) for next to nothing.
To me, this is a big slap in the face.Mostly it's another way for socialist liberals to force you to give your hard earned income to someone else not as "fortunate" (your income isn't from hard work or years of education, it's from luck).
It will also, of course, buy a lot of votes for the politicians taking from the "rich" (you) and giving to the poor.
Take heart, though! Maybe next year they'll take another 10% to give to Mexico and the following year another 10% to give to Somalia to support the pirates. Soon we can all apply to Mexico for our welfare, and cross the border to use their hospitals as ours will have disappeared.
Romney required all Massachusettes citizens to purchase health insurance as Governor in 2006- it still is in effect. In result, the state of Massachusetts has saved Millions in state spending towards health care. This same model will be applied at a federal level and save the country a lot:
1. No longer pay for free riders
2. No longer pay for illegal immigrants
3. Decrease the unemployment rate by steadily increasing jobs in the medical field( more insured individuals will be in the market)
5. Allow students to be covered by parents so they can pay off loans faster
6. Less overall debt to the average American
And most of all, it will allow all Americans a fair chance to obtain medical care regardless of a preexisting condition!
- screamingposted 12 years ago0
I'm amazed that so many so=called Christians put "Money or cost" over another life. To say an infant, child,or adults life is worthless! This country has turned into a sad state of affairs in my opinion! Most have no idea what a insurance policy costs for a family, because their employer picks up the "Bulk of the cost" for their insurance. They obviously don't understand what "lifetime benefit is either". But God forbid, this people become unemployed, lose their insurance, or exceed the lifetime benefit of their plan! Then, maybe the, they would "understand" what it means to be without health insurance. For those Christians, I will say a special prayer for your forgiveness of putting "money over human life!"
And I'm amazed at the number of people that think that govt. is a limitless supply of money, goods and services. Our govt. grossly overspends what it has already; eventually that bill will come due and we will reap the rewards of living on borrowed money. Obamacare will simply accelerate the process, hastening the time when health care is not affordable for anyone as the country enters a depression the likes of which it has never seen.
There are limits to what anyone can spend or purchase, individual or country, Christian or heathen, rich or poor. National health care at the level being proposed is beyond those limits and all the breast beating and complaints that people don't care won't change that sad fact.
If you want to pray for something, pray that our national debt be magically erased. At least that way we could pay for this travesty for a few years before the debt builds past where it is now.
If we could clean up all the corruption, we wouldn't be in this mess. I wrote a rant about this years ago.
Meanwhile, here's my two-cents:
Email this link to everyone you know. Strike now while everyone is in a frenzy and is more inclined to actually do something. http://www.stopmedicarefraud.gov/reportfraud.html
Include text from this federal site in your email. Especially the part about getting a cash reward. Also applies to Medicaid.
What a day... Good night all.But perhaps the most egregious sin in all of this debate is that people refuse to read. Further, it is because this initiative is being promoted by an African American man that many people refuse to open their minds, be intelligent, and focus on the facts rather than 'sensational talking points'. America is not colorblind...It's just that simple.
drMomAsks, you hit the nail on the head! But very few will actually admit it!
Thanks screaming for your validation. I know this to be true all too well. It is hard to accept for people who do not want to admit it, and almost impossible for people who do not look like me to understand. I was counting down the seconds until someone 'screamed racecard'. But I don't care. Because once again, a quick look at history will explain it all. But then again, we aren't really taught these things in formal education, so my theory about how people don't READ is proven again. I will never argue with someone about something they don't know anything about. That is fruitless. But I am entitled to discuss exactly what I 'live' everyday, and watch the 'squeaky wheel get the oil'. Thanks for your ability to be honest. You are among the wonderful few.
I promise you, my criticism of the current prez is not race-influenced anymore than my dislike of Mitt Romney is because he's white. Perhaps there are some out there who are racially influenced, but in my experience they are very few to non-existent. By pushing race to be the only explanation of any opposition to ideas present by people of color, it discredits their ideas and makes it impossible to work with and debate the ideas to improve them.
I agree with your point Bob. Let me say that perhaps I should not have stated my post as if there were only an 'absolute' reason. But because my 'experience' is different from yours, I do believe that this dynamic plays a role in the actions of many. Race is NOT the ONLY explanation, but a part in many cases. But it does need to be considered instead of being 'balked' at...because to do that is also making the issue of pervasive discrimination and racism in America impossible to improve. It will not 'simply go away' if we 'ignore it'. If people are not guilty of it...fine. But as soon as it is mentioned, some people go BALLISTIC! I wonder why? And if they are, then admitting it is more noble than not. I am able to be objective, but no one can argue with me about my experience.
Completely agreed, things like that recent poll of GOP primary voters in Tennessee that found that almost half thought interracial marriages were wrong make me wonder just how rare this racial bias is.
So true. I am a psychologist and teach (among other core courses) African American psychology and the Psychology of Racism. I wish that people would read more and become informed. I have learned so many things that I never knew before...just from having to teach these subjects.
Read that poll, had to read it twice. Lived in Texas for years, some "political incorrectness" but nothing of that caliber. Ridiculous. But was the poll whether interracial marriages are wrong, or whether they should be illegal? I still think it's ridiculous if it's the former, but if it's the latter I would be very disturbed.
Certainly racism should be considered as a possible factor; the problem arises only when some become so convinced that this is the reason that they fail to consider other possibilities. That's when debates and discussions become pointless.
Living in the Bay Area for the past few years, it's true that my experience has been quite positive, and I am full of hope that the US and the world can become "color-blind". A good step towards that would be encouraging criticism and discussion on the basis of ideas, not race, in any direction.But that is the problem Bob. We should never want to ignore the fact that we are all part of the human race that includes many varieties. In fact, we are different, even within each ethnic group. We need to strive to acknowledge and appreciate the differences.
Agreed, completely. I actually wrote a hub a while back about racism and sexism stating that same thing. if you're interested, here's the link: http://bobzermop.hubpages.com/hub/Why-s … -are-wrong . I consider myself an individualist and above all a humanist.
In the past 24 hours since the decision came through, I have not heard anyone mention race, until now?
What the hell does color have to do with this?? Why is it you are always bringing up race? Nobody said anything about Romney being white when he did his version of healthcare and people were up in arms in his state about it! Give me a break!!
You are the ONLY person to bring up race here, so maybe you are the one who is NOT colorblind!You see in the end all they have is shame to use on you. The race card and now we are getting the "sponge" card for folks who don't feel the need for the Unaffordable Health Care Act.
I don't think race is a factor in the outrage; haven't heard it mentioned once till now.
Bob, if you disagree with the President or any program or system he has sponsored you can only be a racist. Did you not know that by now?
That is true unfortunately. We are the FIRST western nation to elect a black man to the highest position in the country, but that is still not good enough. The race card has been over-played and I for one am fed up with it!
People who bring race into the discussion are the one's who need to take a good hard look in the mirror and see THEMSELVES for what THEY are.And now they are going to have another weapon because they made Obamacare a blanket law that you M U S T participate in or be fined through the IRS. Did you know that fine is progressive and your wages can be garnished? i am sure jail time could ensue which would be interesting because that would mean the individual would get this health care paid for by us anyway. Kind of a neat little trick there huh?
Your wage cannot be "garnished". The full ruling here: http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/image … h.care.pdf
And Roberts' summary here: Quoting a summary by Justice Roberts (Any underlining is by me, for emphasis): "The individual mandate requires most Americans to maintain “minimum essential” health insurance coverage. 26 U. S. C. §5000A. The mandate does not apply to some individuals, such as prisoners and undocumented aliens. §5000A(d). Many individuals will receive the required coverage through their employer, or from a government program such as Medicaid or Medicare. See §5000A(f). But for individuals who are not exempt and do not receive health insurance through a third party, the means of satisfying the requirement is to purchase insurance from a private company."
"Beginning in 2014, those who do not comply with the mandate must make a “[s]hared responsibility payment” to the Federal Government. §5000A(b)(1). That payment, which the Act describes as a “penalty,” is calculated as a percentage of household income, subject to a floor based on a specified dollar amount and a ceiling based on the average annual premium the individual would have to pay for qualifying private health insurance. §5000A(c). In 2016, for example, the penalty will be 2.5 percent of an individual’s household income, but no less than $695 and no more than the average yearly premium for insurance that covers 60 percent of the cost of 10 specified services (e.g., prescription drugs and hospitalization)." (p.7)If I didn't know any better, this seems like a great, "divide and conquer" tatic. A good way to bring down a country from within.
http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/ … page/full/
Once again...
Bob Zermop---Certainly racism should be considered as a possible factor;
did you forget writing this?I posted some other posts above clarifying my meaning.
- PrettyPantherposted 12 years ago0
JS, you press me to provide an answer and then you don't respond? What....?
As far as reading the bill goes, there are plenty of good summaries about what is contained in the bill, if you don't want to read it. But, please, if you rely on a summary, please make sure the person/organization that prepared it is reliable and doesn't have reason to put a political slant on it. - screamingposted 12 years ago0
The part no one is hearing about is not the healthcare part as much as the increase on capital gain for the wealthy (over $250,000.00 gain and above). Do you really think they care about your health? Follow the money!
"Because THE CHIEF JUSTICE finds the withholding—not the granting—of federal funds incompatible with the Spending Clause, Congress’ extension of Medicaid remains available to any State that affirms its willingness to participate."
This is a serious health care bill! If my State chooses to participate in the Medicaid Expansion program; young single people will not have to worry about health insurance! Do people that are against the ACA realize what this bill actually offers the public.
People! You have to READ this judgement to learn just what you might get out of it. I don't care what anybody says about some silly tax penalty that won't effect you in any way; this bill and this decision will change so many lives for the better, for real! for now! and as long as you live.You don't even have to read the judgment.
The positive aspects of ACA are easy to find.
You just have to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh (who, if he is half a man and follows through on his 'threat' should be relocating to Costa Rica as we speak) and watching Fox News.
Guess what. I don't watch or listen to either. You don't have to.
Funny when people just assume you're getting your ideas from someone else. Huh, I wonder where that assumption comes from; it couldn't be that that's why they do? Or is it just total disrespect for another point of view? Intelligent, good people can disagree on things; it doesn't mean anyone is stupid. Of course, it doesn't preclude it either.
On a totally different note: Someone tell Rush Limbaugh not to let the door hit him on the way out.
Since I am in the presence of such massively intellectual people here I need an answer to something related to the ACA, Obamacare, or whatever we will call it.
I am familiar with Dodd-Frank, McCain-Feingold and such other pieces of famous legislation that became law. Now those are named after their sponsors. Presumably they had some input in the authoring.
It's somewhat well known that Barack Obama did no such work on ACA.
So who did? Who wrote the gigantic, rain forest tree killing thing?- screamingposted 12 years ago0
I keep hearing how middle class taxes are going up. Give me an example of that please. I do see where capital gain tax is going up, or tanning tax being added, but nothing affecting the middle class. The big one is capital gains, which the wealthy are against. Is this just a Republican scare factor? Like using the work IRS to make you think they will be coming after you?
I like the idea but it's the execution that concerns me. I don't believe that the cost will go down enough to not cause a financial hardship on the average middle class 30 something individual that doesn't currently have coverage. I'm waiting for the unintended consequences to pop up on this law just like they do on every other thing the government puts it hands into. Although my thoughts are that with this law, they will be really ugly.
My doctor had two prices for office visits. One for "cash" paying customers and one for when they had to bill the insurance. The cash payment was 1/2 what the insured rate was because he didn't have to wait six months to get paid. I asked about that when I noticed it.
I went almost five years without health insurance once and had to go to the emergency room twice during that time.
Yeah, it was really hard to make those payment arrangements with the hospital and pay them a payment every month for a while. <--- That's sarcasm in case you didn't recognize it.
It was still cheaper than buying private insurance. Right now my insurance doesn't cost me a dime and it's decent. I'm wondering if it will change with this fiasco.I wish I could find a doctor to take 1/2 of his fee or even the reasonable or customary fee. In my area you're charged full price with no reduction in price.
I noticed it on a piece of paper on the desk and that's when I asked about it. You might be surprised if you ask a family doctor what their cash price is. Most doctors around where I am have a different rate for cash than when they have to bill the insurance company.
Hospitals will also send you an itemized bill if you ask them for one, but usually only if you ask. On one emergency room visit, I was charged for services and items that I didn't receive and I only knew that from looking at the itemized bill. They removed those items with no questions when I mentioned it. I was also charged an outrageous amount for other things that I simply told them was a ridiculous price and pointed out the price of the same item in a drug store and they dropped the price.
Hospitals around me will also give you a discount if you pay in cash. Since the bills are not all consolidated into one, a person can knock quite a bit off of their visit when they take the time to communicate with the hospital, the doctors and anyone else that they get a bill from as a result of their medical care needs.
Lol, someone in the answers area called Canada a socialist country. I am so sick of the horror stories being passed on about Canadian health care as fact "people lining up for hours" to see a doctor (maybe in the ER where the most injured or serious are seen first, or a walk in clinic; I make appointments to see the doctor I chose and never wait more than 10 minutes past my appointment time), people coming in droves to get medical treatment in the US (99% of the time it's for elective surgeries and people don't want to wait or if a medical procedure is not as common here) we pay a huge chunk of money to support health care (I don't believe our taxes are worse than they are in the US). I know the health care system in Canada is not perfect (and being hurt more by cutbacks from a Conservative government) but at least you know you will get the care you need. Made up horror stories do not help anyone's side.
- jenuboukaposted 12 years ago0
Forget the Obamacare; I wish he would of went after the health care system as a whole....They charge way too much for services; perhaps if the health community would stop being selfish or the insurance companies (remember that recording from an ex pres?) We wouldn't be in this debacle of debt. Perhaps if we could seek medical help in the er for a flat rate; to which covered those who are not able to afford it that would be easier. And let's not get started on the insane money for a prescription. What, are they lacing them in gold???
It seems to me, that while this new "law" or whatever will grant more aid; it still does not address the real issue; the system as a whole. Mass greed; no morality. The taxes should be on those insurance companies and the outrageous bills just to get some dental work done. Just saying. The last er visit to check an allergic reaction cost me over $1500 dollars; really guys really...And to pull my wisdom teeth will put me back over $3 grand. Granted I have no insurance but have you tried to apply lately. Jeez, they look you at you funny if you fart too much. Sorry ma'am, we see here you pass gas about 16 times a day that is two fart too many......
Related Discussions
- 50
Do you believe that the nuisance known as Obamacare will finally be repealed? W
by Grace Marguerite Williams 6 years ago
Do you believe that the nuisance known as Obamacare will finally be repealed? Why? Why not?I believe that the government SHOULD NOT be in private affairs such as health care. I believe that health care is the sole responsibility of the individual. If individuals want health care,...
- 152
Obamacare increase the avability of healthcare in what ways?
by Judy Specht 8 years ago
I have been listening to how the government has a billion dollars for getting people to sign up for the Affordable Healthcare Act. Would that money have been better spent training more doctors and building new hospitals? New Jersey has closed how many community hospitals in the last few...
- 111
Why are some people so against Obamacare?
by ElSeductor 11 years ago
Why are some people so eager to take away healthcare for people with pre-existing conditions?
- 46
Trump's HealthCare plan to repeal ObamaCare
by Susie Lehto 8 years ago
HEALTHCARE REFORM TO MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAINSince March of 2010, the American people have had to suffer under the incredible economic burden of the Affordable Care Act—Obamacare. This legislation, passed by totally partisan votes in the House and Senate and signed into law by the most divisive and...
- 764
Obamacare. Just what does it mean to you.
by OLYHOOCH 12 years ago
This is just one of many Re-plys, I receive each day. I thought I might share this one with you,,,,, Thanks. And from one of my favorite pundits, Stella Paul, more motivation to work our tails off in this election season. June 30, 2012 A Surgeon Cuts to the Heart of the ObamaCare Nightmare By...
- 59
The train wreck that is ObamaCare
by Alexander A. Villarasa 10 years ago
What does one expect of a piece of legislation that was voted on, and passed both by the Senate and Congress, signed into law by Pres. Obama, and certified by the Supreme Court as being constitutional? High Hopes of course, but in the case of the Affordabe Health Care Act (popularly...