DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: sirs on December 09, 2014, 01:35:35 PM
-
Its funny, watching The DC Dems absolutely blast Gruber on the Hill. But the reason I find it funny, is that the Dems are so mad, not so much for what Gruber said, but that Gruber exposed what the hard left really thinks about the populace on the whole, and why Government is so "needed" to guide the stupid masses, even lying to them, in order to pass things that they wouldn't otherwise support, if they knew the truth. Like Gruber said, its like making the people "take their medicine", because they know what's best.
Also notice how the frequent justification for Obamination care is no longer about reigning in health care costs, bringing down premiums, nor was it ever about improving the quality of care....no, now its all about "look how many are insured now". Screw the part that made not having health insurance a crime, and screw the part that dumped millions off their plans and doctors that they DID LIKE, forcing them to get Obamacare, go bankrupt, or go criminal. And screw the quality of care, in exchange that "more are insured" justification crap
-
Not having insurance is not a crime. It is just a taxable event.
-
If you don't pay taxes, that's a crime, ergo, not having insurance is now a crime
-
Oh, please.
Not paying a parking ticket gets you a fine. No one is going to jail over this.
This country desperately needs universal health care. Anything that brings this about is fully justified.
Hospitals still refuse to reveal what operations cost, and often what the patient must pay. But the rate of increase in medical services is waaaay down.
-
I never claimed anyone was going to jail, Dr Deflection. The fact remains that there's a government mandate that we have to have health insurance. Failure to adhere to the mandate is a crime...punished via a fine. We were sold a pack of lies, disguised as medicine that's supposedly good for us, regardless if we want it or not. Which is why the lies to push it in the first place
-
Okay, so medicine is NOT good for us.
We should become Christian Scientists and pray.
We should give voodoo, obeah and the i ching a try.
-
Mr Literal strikes......never said that medicine wasn't good, Dr Deflection. What specifically isn't good is Government mandating specifically what medicine we're to take, regardless of if we like it or not, sold to us on the clear promise/pledge that we could keep what we did like.
Now, try addressing the point being made vs arguing points, no one is making
-
actually I got serious doubts about politics being involved with medicine. because with conservatives we got very limited pain treatments. liberals has gotten people to focus on nutrition only.
ex. their is very little pursuit to cure gout. simply be vegan or just live with the pain.
-
actually I got serious doubts about politics being involved with medicine.
You absolutely should, Kimba. It's not just serious, it's downright scary. That's not Government's role.....at least at the Federal level. Well intentioned ideas, like everyone having healthcare is a noble idea. But the idea needs to be thought out in a morally & financially focused manner, and within the parameters of how we, as a nation want to use our Government. The Constitution is clear....there are clear parameters at what the Fed can mandate. Taxes are one of those, which is why Obamacare got passed.
Do we want to use Government to force others to think, act, function, as some Gruber-like know-it-alls, would lie to us, in order to fool the masses that their ideas are the way to go?....or do we want a Government that protects our freedoms to do what we want, when we want, so long as it doesn't impact someone else's rights to do what they want, when they want? 1 version requires a massive amount of control to everyone's lives. The other does provide the freedom to screw up more often, make bad choices and have deal with greater individual repercussions of those actions.
-
This country desperately needs universal health care. Anything that brings this about is fully justified.
This is the money quote. that literally reinforces everything I, and so many others have been saying
-
Yeah, it indicates that you don't want your fellow citizens to be healthy.
Medicine cannot be price competitive without government intervention. The free market does not work when you are desperate and bleeding to death from an accident.
-
Yeah, it indicates that you don't want your fellow citizens to be healthy.
Again, nothing of the sort. I want my fellow citizens to choose to be healthy.....or not. It's none of mine, yours, or the Government's fricken business if one doesn't want to adhere to some calorie starved veggie rich diet, that The First Community Organizer Lady would want to mandate us to follow.
But like I said, thanks for the bright spotlight to the point being made...that for the hard core left, ANYTHING is justified to push some ideological agenda, even lying and ignoring the Constitution, and damn any consequences.
-
uhm .we can`t say choice was denied since this was voted with frown upon after effects. I do notice bright spot in all this but nobody will talk about it. pre-existing condition. why is it not mentioned?
-
It's been mentioned frequently, but could have been dealt with, in perhaps 5 pages of legislation, vs the 2000 mutation. Instead, it was part of the "bait", along with the notion that this would bring down health care costs, and those who had insurance and a doctor they liked, could keep them
So, Kimba, can we toss out Obamcare and just focus on the legislation that would be specific to dealing with non-insured folks with pre-existing conditions? Would you be supportive to that?
-
I would before but now the genie is out of bottle and it`s entwined big time. removing it might not a be viable but changing it is workable maybe. the reason I brought this up is because I know a friend who surprised me about her pre-existing condition and it shocked me about how general that definition actually is. she has asthma. that is such a common condition I just couldn`t believe it wouldn`t be treated. meaning pre-existing is way more common than we think.
-
That was the purpose of making Obamacare so mangled, and as Gruber accurately referenced, its language tortured, to better hide all the gimmics, kick-backs, and ultimate control that is the end game of Obamacare. Prescious little had to do with pre-existing conditions. The "genie" may be out, but it can be deprived of its financial food, and in the meantime, supplemental legislation can be worked on to actually address the issue of pre-existing conditions
-
Pre existing conditions affected half the population of this country. The older you get, the more likely you were to have one of them.
-
And 5 pages of legislation could have addressed that, vs thousands of pages, which in turned managed to get millions dumped from the insurance and doctors they were promised they could keep. Not to mention most of that population you refer to, ALREADY HAD INSURANCE, so that any condition that came up, was not some pre-existing one, in particular those "older" folks you refer to
You don't destroy a system that worked for the vast majority of the population of this country....THAT THEY DID LIKE, to help a fraction of that population. You work on legislation that specifically helps that fraction.
Then again, that was never Obamacare's intention
-
already have insurance?
but that`s also the issue about pre-existing . it`s not just people who don`t have insurance but people who got insurance but don`t get coverage for their conditions. ex. new hires which likely don`t have the option to carry over their old plan.
remember very few people has their own personal insurance due to lack of affordable choice which has always been very limited.
ricoh corp. 1st hires DO NOT have coverage on pre-existing condition on their probation period. so their all have to pay out of pocket.
-
already have insurance?
Yes
but that`s also the issue about pre-existing .
I understand. Xo was trying to blend the 2, in order to make his population pool bigger...(the older a person gets). Fact remains that the amount of folks being denied coverage for pre-existing conditions, was but a fraction of those who have now been thrown off their insurance, and have have lost their doctor, they they had liked, and yet, still there are those who are uninsured. And now thanks to Obamacare, many others that managed to hold on to what insurance was left, have double/triple their previous premiums.
And this was all foreseen.....but what was being repeated to appease the masses was the consumate pledge that all that was bogus...that premiums would come down, that healthcare costs would be contained, and that if you liked your insurance and your Doctor, you could keep them....period
-
There was no way any law could have required every insurance policy to comply with the new requirement written after the policy was issued.
The fact is that this country NEEDS universal health care and serious government intervention in the medical profession and the way patients are charged for services when they have not been told what they will even be obliged to pay.
Prior to the ACA, if you were seriously ill or in an accident, you were forced to agree to pay for whatever the Hell the hospital decided you needed, at whatever unannounced price the hospital wanted to charge. There can be no comparison shopping when no one will tell you what you need or how much it costs. My father died on the 16th of February, and was removed at 5 PM on the 16th and the hospital charged him for a room on the 17th and the 18th. It took four letters a bunch of phone calls and a threat from a lawyer to make them couch up a refund.
-
Okay, so medicine is NOT good for us.
We should become Christian Scientists and pray.
We should give voodoo, obeah and the i ching a try.
That is a good point.
Does the government have the right to tell us what to believe and is this right to tell us what we should believe unlimited?
The government is no less liable to fall to believing mistakes as the average individual is (for obvious reasons).
So there ought to be a limit on the governments power to command our thoughts.
Should Voodoom actually be forbidden?
How far from forbidding it , is forcing someone who would rather have voodoo, to pay for orthodox medical care?
If you are being forced to pay insurance or tax that will be spent on medical care you don't believe in , are your rights not violated?
-
Prior to the ACA,.....
People had far more options in choosing what they wanted, and who they wanted. Your opinion of "need" is far outweighed by not just the massive inefficiency, waste, & bureaucracy that Government brings, but by the total dishonest/immoral tact of lying to the populace to try and get it passed
-
There are no bureaucracies worse than those of hospitals. Prior to the ACA. they would not reveal that cost to the patient of their services, and of course, nor would they reveal what the actual cost to them of the service was. They would routinely charge $5 for a pill that cost them $5.00 for 100 pills or more.
Competition is not possible unless the consumer knows what the cost will be in at least two different facilities. This was not possible prior to the ACA. The market could function with medicine as practiced, which is why the costs to the patients were so incredibly high. Only the government has the power to force the truth out of the healthcare weasels. The only cure for a hideous and opaque bureaucracy is a more powerful bureaucracy that advocates for the patient.
-
The only cure for a hideous and opaque bureaucracy is a more powerful bureaucracy that advocates for the patient.
A more powerful, more hideous and more opaque bureaucracy?
The Government responds even less to market .
One of the problems with hospital cost is that they try to serve the indigent and charge everyone else.
Another trouble is that small hospitals are not profitable at all, the rural communities of Georgia have lost about two hospitals per year for the last two decades.
-
There are no bureaucracies worse than those of hospitals.
Except for Government.....exponentially bigger, bloated, with far more waste & fraud, and far less accountability to either
-
The only cure for a hideous and opaque bureaucracy is a more powerful bureaucracy that advocates for the patient.
A more powerful, more hideous and more opaque bureaucracy?
The Government responds even less to market .
One of the problems with hospital cost is that they try to serve the indigent and charge everyone else.
Another trouble is that small hospitals are not profitable at all, the rural communities of Georgia have lost about two hospitals per year for the last two decades.
BINGO (and once again, the qualifier is required that its not sirs giving himself a "bingo", merely that its a term provided that demonstrates substantial agreement to what someone else so expertly articulated)