Hypocrisy (Warning--Health Care Thread)--updated
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=184914
Printed Date: 03 May 2024 at 10:57pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Hypocrisy (Warning--Health Care Thread)--updated
Posted By: Mack
Subject: Hypocrisy (Warning--Health Care Thread)--updated
Date Posted: 16 March 2010 at 5:21pm
|
2nd Warning: This is intended as a health-care related thread in which I plan on saying bad things about the Democratic party and expect others to do so as well. Those who dislike such threads may opt out by using the "back" button on their browser. I found http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100316/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_overhaul - this article on the web and, in my opinion, it highlights/epitomizes the arrogance and hypocrisy of the Democratic party. A few of my favorite quotes (and my related thoughts) are below: WASHINGTON – Democrats defended plans to push massive health care legislation through the House without a direct vote and Republicans assailed the strategy Tuesday . . . . I agreed with the Democrats when they said Bush/Republican use of such strategies was "indefensible" and now they go and do this. . . . House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said that no final decision had been made on the complex parliamentary strategy, which would allow House Democrats to pass the Senate's health care legislation without voting on the bill itself. Instead House members, who dislike the Senate bill, would vote on a rule for debate that would deem the bill passed once a smaller package of fixes also had passed. . . . So . . . they're going to try passing it by voting on something else? That can't be right. . . . "We will vote on it in one form or another." . . . Apparently it is right. So, the president want's this to pass, but doesn't have the balls to either say "pass it no matter what" or "the end does not justify the means." . . . "There's going to be a vote on health care reform. You're going to know where people are on health care," Gibbs said. . . . But we still won't know where the president is on underhanded strategies related to passing such a bill. Not a McConnell fan, but he describes the situation pretty accurately. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to shield lawmakers from having to vote directly on the Senate-passed health care bill because it's unpopular with House Democrats. Aha! Now we know why they are voting on it this way. It is a way of voting for something else that only happens to pass the Health Care Bill as a side-effect. You would think, if the people actually wanted this, that they could just vote on the bill itself. I can already see future congressional hearings with Democrats making statements like "I didn't support the bill, I just voted for a small package of amendments to it that also happened to pass it" or "hmmm . . . well, I guess it depends on what your definition of 'vote' is." "Nobody wanted to vote for the Senate bill," Pelosi, D-Calif., explained in a round-table meeting with liberal bloggers Monday. So, they're going to do something sneaky and assume the public is too stupid to understand what happened? (If they're right, we deserve whatever happens to health care and the economy.) Obama has turned up the pressure . . . wooing freshman Democrats in the Oval Office . . . holding . . . sessions . . . that never appeared
on his official schedule. So much for open government. ------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: Hysteria
Date Posted: 16 March 2010 at 5:34pm
| I skimmed over your post and I'm pretty sure I gathered that you are accusing the Democrats of not being bipartisan and Obama not being open enough about what he is doing. I mean, I know you're old Mack, but has your senility really erased the eight years before Obama from your mind? :) |
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 16 March 2010 at 5:40pm
------------- 
|
Hysteria wrote:Posted By: Hysteria
Date Posted: 16 March 2010 at 5:50pm
|
Oh, my b. Perhaps I should have read the whole thing the first time, but oh well - at least I admitted I didn't thoroughly read it. Yes, this is hypocritical. They are politicians, this is what they do. |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 16 March 2010 at 5:58pm
|
I don't know if people expected Democrats to actually be any better once they had the majority. I wanted them to, but as Hysteria said, they're politicians. Frankly, I really think our system needs to change by accepting the fact that it is possible for everyone to vote on issues. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Rofl_Mao
Date Posted: 16 March 2010 at 7:18pm
So thats an excuse? |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 16 March 2010 at 7:20pm
I was hoping that they would have learned from the mistakes of the Republicans in general and Newt Gingrich in particular. -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 16 March 2010 at 8:02pm
|
I don't care if you don't make a health care thread. It isn't annoying, it makes sense, you don't do 12 a day, and it isn't ONLY bashing democrats/obama. While you do bash democrats it ------------- Que pasa? 
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 16 March 2010 at 9:06pm
I agree. The key word here was "hope". It's amazing how similar all politicians are. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 16 March 2010 at 9:38pm
How dare you be rationale and civilized with me!  -------------
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 16 March 2010 at 10:54pm
|
It's thier turn after 8 years of "Bush" and Republican bashin.
I love the bumper sticker: I will give your President the same respect you gave mine for 8 years. 'With great power comes great responsibility' is a total fail with the current crop of Democrats. Representitive Republic, means you represent the people and thier wishes, not vote as you personally see fit to CYA under Pelosi, Reid, and Obama. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 16 March 2010 at 11:08pm
|
I'm still trying to get their thought process;
The majority of Americans are against the current proposed plan. They admit that the majority are against the current plan. They admit that they'll probably lose their elections in November if they vote for the plan that the majority are against. But they still insist on pushing it forward without a single change, and in a way that says "Screw you majority, we don't care what you think because we know better then you"... why? If it DOES somehow get passed, the Supreme Court will have a heck of a time ruling on states rights. ------------- 
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 16 March 2010 at 11:51pm
|
The current challenge will be the 'forced' contract of the bill, or a fine. Virginia is leading the charge per 10th Amendment, where a 'contract' is voluntary, and any citizen of Virginia charged with a fine for not purchasing a mandatory Federal induced 'contract' will be defended by the state.
The Supreme Court already is preparing for the cases, and the precidents are already in place. When the Feds tried to force a 'contracted'storage of out of state produced industrial waste on NY, NY sued and won since the Federal GOvernment can not force a 'contract'on the unwilling. That 10th Amendment thing will be tough for any bill to overcome as written. -------------
|
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 17 March 2010 at 2:47am
|
The drive and hypocrisy behind the health care plan is ridiculous, but whatever. The Dems have made it clear that there's no stopping this bill, and so we might as well sit back and watch the circus. ------------- 
|
Posted By: rednekk98
Date Posted: 17 March 2010 at 3:12am
| I'm beginning to hate politics. You have partisan wing nuts who believe that the Bush administration was so corrupt as to blatantly commit election fraud, kill thousands of US civilians so they could start a war, rig another election, then bomb levy's in New Orleans to kill black people, and create a secret earthquake machine. Both fringe groups think the other side is so evil that they will tolerate whatever evil their side commits because they feel it is necessary to counter the opposition. Unfortunately our political system is such that you need to be a partisan hack to get elected. I'm not certain that being forced to buy insurance is a terrible idea (I live in MA and our health care laws are very similar to the ones purposed) but this process is disgusting, and the Democrats will pay in November, even if the bill turns out to be a good one. I think we can all agree that we need health care reform (except those who want to adopt a faith-healing system) but considering the political climate, compehensive package deals seem like a bad idea, why not pass tort reform, and pre-existing condition and anti-genetic-discrimination laws seperatly since they could probably get through. the only real reason for this approach is so on party can take credit/blame for reform and has no bearing on public sentiment or pragmatism. I hope after the dems get hosed in november Obama cleans ouse in his cabinet, as dense as Bush was, he at least got Rummy out. The Chicago crew has to go. I'd like to believe my president isn't a deusche, but he keeps bad company. |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 17 March 2010 at 3:35pm
Yeah, only real crazy people believe any of that. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 17 March 2010 at 4:48pm
|
I don't think he committed election fraud. I do think that the way the Florida ballots were handled was at least wrong, if not actually unconstitutional.
------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 18 March 2010 at 5:35pm
|
The AP report on the Presidents Fox News interview. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama_fox_news - Link Somebody is hoping things will change before they have to provide a direct answer to a direct question. Interesting quotes:
If the health care reform is so darn important someone needs to grow a pair and just say "this is how we're going to get it through." (I wouldn't like him any better, but I would respect him a bit more.) -------------
|
Posted By: God
Date Posted: 18 March 2010 at 6:02pm
|
So what was the question he was presumably dodging? How do I know that the article is correct if only know the answer without the question? So... I watched the interview and Obama just played Baier's game. Baier asked loaded questions and Obama answered with the information that he wanted to get across. Since the vote hasnt happened yet, how is he going to predict what may or may not happen?
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 18 March 2010 at 6:38pm
and
and
-------------
|
Posted By: God
Date Posted: 18 March 2010 at 7:42pm
|
I meant what was the question from the reporter (btw, those are not questions).... As for your first quote, the transcript reads: "BAIER: You have said at least four times in the past two weeks: "the
United States Congress owes the American people a final up or down vote
on health care." So do you support the use of this Slaughter rule? The
deem and pass rule, so that Democrats avoid a straight up or down vote
on the Senate bill?
OBAMA: Here's what I think is going to happen and what should happen. You now have a proposal from me that will be in legislation, that has the toughest insurance reforms in history, makes sure that people are able to get insurance even if they've got preexisting conditions, makes sure that we are reducing costs for families and small businesses, by allowing them to buy into a pool, the same kind of pool that members of Congress have." My Interpretation: Baier asked the President about a procedure that may or may not happen to pass health care. Obama answers that the point is not how it passes that matters but what passes that matters. Proof of my point: "OBAMA: What I can tell you is that the vote that's taken in the House
will be a vote for health care reform. And if people vote yes, whatever
form that takes, that is going to be a vote for health care reform. And I
don't think we should pretend otherwise." Next quote of your addresses this interaction: Baier: "Let me insert this. We asked our viewers
to e-mail in suggested questions. More than 18,000 people took time to
e-mail us questions. These are regular people from all over the country.
Lee Johnson, from Spring Valley, California: "If the bill is so good
for all of us, why all the intimidation, arm twisting, seedy deals, and
parliamentary trickery necessary to pass a bill, when you have an
overwhelming majority in both houses and the presidency?" Obama's reply: OBAMA: Bret, I get 40,000 letters or
e-mails a day.
Baier interrupts with BAIER: I know. OBAMA: I could read the exact same e-mail — Again Baier interrupts: BAIER: These are people. It's not just Washington punditry. OBAMA: I've got the exact same e-mails, that I could show you, that talk about why haven't we done something to make sure that I, a small business person, am getting as good a deal as members of Congress are getting, and don't have my insurance rates jacked up 40 percent? Why is it that I, a mother with a child with a preexisting condition, still can't get insurance? So the issue that I'm concerned about is whether not we're fixing a broken system. My interpretation of that exchange: Baier tries to intimidate with large numbers of people upset with pending health care legislation. Obama counters with two-times the number in support of his side. Baier tries to defend his now smaller number of emails with a sympathy cry: "But these are real people with fears!" Obama counters with his even bigger sympathy retort with: "These are real people with real problems." The fox reporter was looking for the President to contradict himself (and later have his fellow talking heads to scream about how weak he is and a flip-flopper) and the President deflected those attempts by not directly answering the questions while still making the points that he wanted to make. Reporter and new channel's thinking: Lets ask the President questions about legislative procedures that have existed forever and have been used by both parties. After he/she answers, lets attack same procedures in attempt to discredit legislation. If president doesnt follow our script lets attack president. When I scroll quickly pass your sig line, my mind always interprets it to read: Too close for submissives, I'm switching to nuns! |
Posted By: God
Date Posted: 18 March 2010 at 7:46pm
To me, that is exactly what he is saying without actually saying it. BAIER: You have said at least four times
in the past two weeks: "the United States Congress owes the American
people a final up or down vote on health care." So do you support the
use of this Slaughter rule? The deem and pass rule, so that Democrats
avoid a straight up or down vote on the Senate bill?
OBAMA: Here's what I think is going to happen and what should happen. You now have a proposal from me that will be in legislation, that has the toughest insurance reforms in history, makes sure that people are able to get insurance even if they've got preexisting conditions, makes sure that we are reducing costs for families and small businesses, by allowing them to buy into a pool, the same kind of pool that members of Congress have. AKA: Just get the bill passed and done. |
Posted By: mod98commando
Date Posted: 18 March 2010 at 9:54pm
------------- oreomann33: Everybody invades Poland Rofl_Mao: And everyone eats turkey Me: But only if they're hungary Mack: Yeah but hungary people go russian through their food and end up with greece on everyth |
Posted By: God
Date Posted: 19 March 2010 at 1:23am
|
Obama isnt writing the legislation. Congress is. This piece of legislation will be changing up until the final writing of the bill, or when it is posted online. Reid or Pelosi are the people to be asking the specifics of this bill not the President for they are more involved than Obama is. He may offer suggestions what he wants to see in the bill but last I check the Congress is in a different branch of the government than the President is. Obama's role is to sell the bill to the public as a positive not know the finer/ super specifics. Just as you would not ask the salesman person what the thread count of the seat belt strap and expect them to know especially if the factory is still sewing the said strap. Certainly you do not expect the sales person to have an opinion as to the process of how the car is made. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 19 March 2010 at 7:27am
|
See that is what bothers me to no end on this whole thing. Obama keeps claiming credit for this bill. He refers to "my bill" over and over. And yet he had nothing to do with it. 2,700 pages... Plus the new revisions under reconciliation.
Well, here is what we know for a fact.
This bill covers 6 years of healthcare that takes 10 years to pay for... So it will bust the budget when it actually has to pay 1 year for 1 years services. (according to history, which is a lot more accurate than guessing government costs, since they always go up...)
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/18/obamacare-will-break-the-bank-not-cut-the-deficit/ - http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/18/obamacare-will-break-the-bank-not-cut-the-deficit/
This bill will increase our insurance costs... Even though the President has lied countless times saying we would "save money, and all get raises from our employers if this passes"...
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iVn9wrhB-3SF-Svo9kZyXd4bHRLAD9EG84VO0 - http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iVn9wrhB-3SF-Svo9kZyXd4bHRLAD9EG84VO0
This bill increases the power of the IRS to come after you if you don't have insurance... So a "choice" of not having insurance could send you to jail... If you choose to follow the constitution and not pay because the government doesn't have the power to force you to buy something.
http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/87697-republicans-assail-irs-provision-in-health-care-bill - http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/87697-republicans-assail-irs-provision-in-health-care-bill -
Oh, and you can "keep your doctor"... unless he is one of the 45% who quit medicine over this fiasco...
http://www.investors.com/newsandanalysis/article.aspx?id=506199 - http://www.investors.com/newsandanalysis/article.aspx?id=506199
Overall, this bill is a power grab, to give the government power to regulate 1/6 of the economy. While breaking the rules set out by the constitution. This should be a state issue. But, as usual the people no longer are in control of our government, it is run by progressives who are much smarter than any of us, so they know how to take care of us.
Notice how this website mirrors the msm today?...
http://www.americanprogress.org/ - http://www.americanprogress.org/
It is just a matter of time before they tell you how much you can make, and how much you deserve to keep...
Oh wait, they already do that.
------------- They tremble at my name... 
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 19 March 2010 at 10:28am
|
I was going to respond again to God's question, but . . . wow . . . mod98commando answered way better than I would have.
-------------
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 19 March 2010 at 10:36am
|
I thought this article was pretty good about the Baier interview...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704207504575130081383279888.html - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704207504575130081383279888.html ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 19 March 2010 at 10:43am
|
wow... This bill will mean the end of private colleges.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/18/cornhusker-kickback-gets-boot-health/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fpolitics+%28Text+-+Politics%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo - http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/18/cornhusker-kickback-gets-boot-health/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fpolitics+%28Text+-+Politics%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo
But the 153 pages of changes to the massive health care package include extra money for hospitals in Tennessee that serve large numbers of low-income patients. And though the bill would revamp the nation's student loan system to make the government the only lender, one bank — the state-owned Bank of North Dakota — would be allowed to continue making student loans. So based on the past, when you control the money, you control the content. And private colleges will be forced to accept the governments
This bill will destroy our education system as we know it.
and here I thought it was to reign in health care costs... Ha.. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 19 March 2010 at 11:18am
It was. This sums it up nicely (bolding added for emphasis):
Edited addition: Because I realized there were aspects of God's question that still needed to be addressed*. (Bolding again added for emphasis.)
-------------
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 19 March 2010 at 2:57pm
|
Na, you're allowed... I talk to him all the time.
Didja see this?
http://www.politico.com/livepulse/0310/EXCLUSIVE__Democrats_plan_doc_fix_after_reform.html?showall - http://www.politico.com/livepulse/0310/EXCLUSIVE__Democrats_plan_doc_fix_after_reform.html?showall
wow... impressive manipulation going on... ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: mod98commando
Date Posted: 19 March 2010 at 7:03pm
True but last time I checked, Obama was one of the people constantly telling us how great this bill is and that we should support it. Is it unreasonable to ask him for details about why he so strongly supports it? And is it not suspicious that he would so blatantly refuse to explain?
Obviously Pelosi and Reid will know more but if Obama is supposed to be selling this to us he better know something about it. He must at least know enough to know it's good so can't he tell us a little more than nothing? The car salesman probably won't know the thread count of the seat belt strap but who would ask that? He could tell you about the condition of the car because that's something a buyer would ask and it helps him determine what to sell it for or, if the condition is good, it could be what makes the sale. Obama was not asked for obscure information at all. He knew the answers but was seemingly afraid to share them. To use your own counter-example, if the salesman knew the answer to the seat belt question (had a manual in front of him or something) yet refused to tell you, would you not wonder if maybe it was out of spec or something? It just doesn't make sense to not answer a question you know the answer to when you supposedly have nothing to hide. So then one must wonder what exactly it is he's trying to hide and whether or not it's something to be concerned over. I personally dislike it immensely when people do that and I refuse to trust him until he starts showing that he deserves it. I'm amazed that you don't see anything wrong with what he's doing, regardless of the topic. ------------- oreomann33: Everybody invades Poland Rofl_Mao: And everyone eats turkey Me: But only if they're hungary Mack: Yeah but hungary people go russian through their food and end up with greece on everyth |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 19 March 2010 at 7:16pm
------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: mod98commando
Date Posted: 19 March 2010 at 7:59pm
LOL  ------------- oreomann33: Everybody invades Poland Rofl_Mao: And everyone eats turkey Me: But only if they're hungary Mack: Yeah but hungary people go russian through their food and end up with greece on everyth |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 20 March 2010 at 12:37pm
|
So, the rules committee in the house is working on the rules prior to
voting on health care tomorrow. http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/20/health.care.main/index.html?section=cnn_latest - Link related to above. So, if they are voting on it tomorrow does anyone know where the latest version and potential changes are posted?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704207504575130081383279888.html - Link for above. Edited Addition: A thought related to the above quote: It almost seems as if the president is stating he won't know what is in the bill (and neither will anyone else) until after the vote. Innocent misstatement or Freudian slip? NB4 whining about not trusting the President by pointing out that trust is earned. -------------
|
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 20 March 2010 at 2:28pm
There may be some more changes if the rules committee allows a manager amendment so Pelosi can change a few things to get more votes. ------------- 
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 20 March 2010 at 4:02pm
|
pelosi said the same thing about "we have to pass it so we can find out what is in it..." earlier in the week. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 20 March 2010 at 4:15pm
Oops. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 20 March 2010 at 4:34pm
|
Yeah, I'm the only one who calls it obamacare...
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&source=hp&q=obamacare&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn - http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&source=hp&q=obamacare&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn
------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 21 March 2010 at 11:04am
|
Mbro, thanks for the link. Well it looks like it will be a http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100320/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_vote_1 - straight vote as opposed to a deem and pass. Good for them. I think that if it passes this way it has a lot better chance of being accepted by the public. Not to say that I still don't think this bill is a bad idea; when you have to show it's good for the deficit by balancing 6 years of benefits against 10 years of collection and stealing from Medicade (which is already short) there is no way the bill will reduce government spending. But at least if it passes, it will be a legitimate vote. I also think the "pass it now and pass the changes later" plan is setting us up for an enormous bait-and-switch. Hopefully, I will be wrong on that. There are still some amazing bribes and questionable spending left in the bill but, since this tends to be true of many bills, I will leave it to others to hash that out if they feel these are exceptionally onerous. -------------
|
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 21 March 2010 at 11:08pm
-------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: slackerr26
Date Posted: 21 March 2010 at 11:21pm
------------- 
|
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 21 March 2010 at 11:43pm
-------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 22 March 2010 at 11:56am
-------------
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 9:02am
|
Only an hour away from the Supreme court ruling... Tidbits that the media will ignore. Democrats are allowed to decide on cases that they worked on while writing said law...Clearly playing both sides of the fence... A republican would recuse themselves if they got put on the court, after working on the case before hand. Prediction, Media will spin massive Obamacare (wait, I was ridiculed for calling it obamacare... and yet, look at the headlines in two hours...) loss as actually the "choice of rich white people taking away the "healthcare rights" of the poor"... Also, will be interesting to watch mr. narcissist lash out that his namesake legislation is gone... I give him less than a week before he publicly loses it. I have a friend who is a single dad, his three daughters (all 18 or older) all live at home now, as they can't find decent work in our area, and they are all on his healthcare... It costs him $100 a paycheck (company matches so the real cost is $200 a paycheck). He voted for Obama, and his costs for healthcare have increased as well as the increase to add his kids (promised for free... whoops) is $2,600 a year just for his kids. (company pays the other $2,600, for a total of $5,200 to have his kids on his policy per year... Just for their insurance... He is planning on dropping them all off his plan as he can't afford the costs with the rising costs of food, gas, ect. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 10:30am
|
Medicine and doctors visits don't cost that much. That's the thing about medial insurance, when you NEED it you NEED it. hospital plans and chronic medication plans are the way to go. Suck up the bills and go off healthcare, but do NOT ever cancel hospital plans. If you think you can't afford them while you are healthy and earning try pay off the debts they will cover if you are invalid for a couple of months..... KBK ------------- Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo. H = 2 |
Posted By: Ceesman762
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 11:10am
|
This just in.... http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/supreme-court-issue-obamacare-decision-135554880.html" rel="nofollow - http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/supreme-court-issue-obamacare-decision-135554880.html ------------- Innocence proves nothing FUAC!!!!! |
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 11:27am
"
with Chief Justice John Roberts, a Bush appointee, joining the liberal wing of the court to save the law." ------------- 
|
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 11:52am
|
And here comes the outrage... -------------  irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 1:13pm
|
Why outrage, the American people elected him... We get what we deserve. The single largest tax increase in the history of the world... AKA Obamacare. During the worst economic conditions of our lifetimes... Looks like BRILLIANT policy to run on for the next election! Who is he going to blame for the massive increase in costs on healthcare? What is funny is how Obama bragged about how Obamacare wasn't a tax, and yet, it was upheld AS A TAX. See title of the thread... ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 1:18pm
|
Sometimes people need to pay taxes to have nice things. ------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 1:57pm
|
I still don't think FE understands what the PPACA actually does. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 1:58pm
Fixed On a more serious note, I am about to offer another Mackstradamus prediction. I predict that many of the forum liberals (that reside in the U.S.) and many of the nation's other liberals are, courtesy of this decision, eventually going to learn the following lesson: The worst thing that can happen isn't always being denied what you wanted . . . sometimes it's being given what you wanted. -------------
|
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 2:06pm
|
Or you can just have health insurance and then you pay for just yourself. Problem solved. -------------
|
Posted By: RoboCop
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 2:47pm
|
%20" rel="nofollow - http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/06/28/obamacare-upheld-how-health-care-reform-will-affect-your-wallet/ If this is an accurate representation of what is going on, then I don't see how it is a bad thing. |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 3:44pm
|
The decision genuinely surprised me. I would have bet large amounts of money on it being 5-4 against. -------------
|
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 4:03pm
Still happens now anyway. ------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 4:38pm
I don't recall voting on the members of the Supreme Court.
Not quite. Granted, I've not gotten through the whole decision yet.
|
Posted By: deadeye007
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 7:38pm
|
I only heard bits and pieces as the day went on, but I was of the understanding that the Supreme Court did not uphold Obamacare by reviewing it and finding it legal. I thought they looked at it, and decided by design it qualifies as a tax so they don't have jurisdiction (for a lack of a better term) on regulating taxes. ------------- Face it guys, common sense is a form of wealth and we're surrounded by poverty.-Strato |
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 7:55pm
It very much was upheld 'as a tax' in the opinions since Obama's lawyers couldn't decide if it was or wasn't during arguments and finally decided it was. Supreme Court said it can NOT fall under the "Commerce Clause", and that the federal government cannot force you to partake in commerce if you don't want to. The worrisome part is now, what CAN'T the feds force you to get with the guise of "if you don't, you'll be taxed"? Yeah... not really looking forward to the day where half my check is taken out in the form of taxes, like much of Europe. -------------
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 7:57pm
I could very well be wrong, as I've not read the whole thing yet, but IIRC the "tax" comes from the ability of the law to levy a tax for those wishing to not partake in the insurance purchase mandate. It wasn't as much of treating the whole bill as a tax, but rather treating the opt-out mechanic of the bill as a tax for the purposes of determining constitutionality. |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 8:18pm
|
I"ll be curious how this effects me. Could be wrong, but it sounds like I just got stuck with more taxes to pay for insurance for those that don't have it. I am also wondering how this will affect our current coverage. Currently, we take my wifes insurance plan at her job. Every year I have to send a letter stating that I am taking their coverage because my job doesnt offer insurance, which they don't. Doesnt the passing of this essentially make a public option available? If so, I wonder if this will count as available coverage from another source and I will now get thrown into the public pool? Will this public insurance pool actually be real insurance or some sort of crappy Medicare type coverage? And at what cost? Considering I have a family history of cancer and exceedingly high cholesterol levels, any insurance I get on my own is typically not going to be cheap. I get the sneaking suspicion that I will now have to pay more for my own insurance AND get to pay more in taxes to cover the costs for others.
Good day! ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 8:27pm
I'm not sure there will be a change, then. Spousal insurance still exists, as do parent/child plans.
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 8:40pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 8:42pm
Ohh. Gotcha. I have no idea. That's an interesting question to which I do not have an answer. As the "public pool" exists more as subsidies funding to allow people to affordably purchase private insurance rather than a Medicare substitute (Much to the chagrin of fans of universal healthcare programs), I'd imagine not, but I'm not going to pretend like I know for sure.
|
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 28 June 2012 at 9:39pm
|
This really didn't change anything regarding tax laws...Congress has, traditionally, been given basically unlimited power regarding taxation. But raising taxes is a tough pill to swallow in this economy so they (wrongly) chose to push it as a mandate instead. The government can't force you to take insurance but they can tax you and spend the money where they want to. That's been an issue raised since the bill was introduced. -------------
|
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 4:55am
|
OPBN, your insurance shouldn't change.That's weird that your wife's company doesn't just offer coverage for spouses I figured that was standard procedure. Isn't she a teacher? Also the insurance exchanges are what you'd be looking at since you're not poor or high risk, the pool thing you were talking about was a temporary thing for people who have pre-existing conditions before the law goes fully in effect. The exchanges are basically a website and a phone line that will make buying insurance easier and explains the terms to you. It allows comparison shopping. -------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 8:09am
 Wow, that was funny... Good luck with that. I see a future filled with LOTS of insurance increases... Because giving out free abortions/birth control/medicine/covering your kids till they are 26 is always "free". AMIRITE! And everything the government runs is efficient and low cost... When reality hits you guys, it will hurt... ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 8:37am
I like the way you always pretend like the inhabitants of this board are naive kids who have yet to experience society. Here's a pro tip-most of us are college / post college aged working males struggling through the worst economic conditions in recent memory. We're well aware of political fallout. -------------
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 9:47am
|
I know how old most of you are, it isn't a slam on your intelligence, it is just a point about your life experience. I have more than you, I've watched this "game" play out and the people like us always end up paying higher costs. I remember paying $4,000 a year for my family healthcare in 2001. Today I pay over $21,000 a year... Oldpbnoob has kids and is in my same age range, he has watched his rates go up (or his employer has absorbed those increases and he hasn't seen it) but if Obamacare stands, it will be the largest tax increase in the history of the world. Employers won't cover that increase... They can't afford to without raising their product costs, and do you really want to pay MORE for everything you buy? That will have ECONOMIC implications, no matter what happens politically. You think times are hard now... Dump a TRILLION in new taxes on the back of the economy, and you will see a whole new level of hurt. I sold my luxury van and bought a 99 jetta for cash... I've paid off all my debt, (and most of my house) and I'm getting ready for the economic mess that will be here before we know it. I've even taken my retirement money out of the stock market... I hope and pray I am wrong, but it could easily go either way right now. What do you guys think of this? http://www.imcitizen.net/chief-justice-roberts-is-a-genius/" rel="nofollow - http://www.imcitizen.net/chief-justice-roberts-is-a-genius/
------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 9:49am
I'm honestly much more interested in having a discussion on here about the actual working components of the act than getting into it about abortions and birth control, because the former is legitimately interesting, as far as potential ramifications economically and culturally go. The latter frankly a worthless conversation, so I don't think I'll partake. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 9:56am
Everything I'm reading is pointing to you being the same as far as plan structure goes, OPBN. From what I'm reading, the "public option" carries an opt-in ability if you either have been denied or would be denied coverage due to existing conditions OR cannot afford a plan in your existing situation. "You" being your family can afford to be covered, so it doesn't seem like any opt-in provisions open up. Again, most of the stuff I'm reading is in legalize, in which I have no formal training in, so salt, grains, etc.
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 10:16am
|
If it does, you can now effectively blame BUSH... And since we are all laughing about this, here is another funny group of clips... ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 11:35am
As it is, our insurance costs have gone already over the past few years. When my wife started 8 years or so ago, our entire insurance costs were covered. Now we are paying a couple of hundred dollars a month AND having to take a policy where we are out a significantly higher out of pocket amount. We were already discussing whether or not we would change our policy to the even higher deductible policy to lower our monthy costs. If I am booted off of this policy, our costs will go up even more, which I seriously think may be a possibility. My wife is going to call when she gets back into town to see if the person that handles the insurance has some insight to this.
It's really easy to say that nothing will change, but some very smart people seem to be unsure of exactly how all this will play out. I hope it does work out, but If I have to start paying higher insurance premiums because I have to get my own policy and I have to pay higher taxes, things are going to seriously suck. I thing some serious reprecussions on the economy could be ahead. ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 11:50am
I'm not sure I understand what you're seeing as the change, then.
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 12:20pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 12:22pm
|
Here are your changes... course you have to go to new media to find them... http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/29/Seven-new-taxes" rel="nofollow - http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/29/Seven-new-taxes
Old media won't cover the "costs" as it doesn't help their campaign. Instead they will interview anyone they can find who thinks ObamaTAX is great! http://abcnews.go.com/Health/medical-organizations-respond-aca-ruling/story?id=16673570" rel="nofollow - http://abcnews.go.com/Health/medical-organizations-respond-aca-ruling/story?id=16673570
------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 12:32pm
That may be an issue, but it won't be the public option, I don't think. It has qualifications for opt-in, and by being covered by your wife's plan already I don't believe you qualify for it, and by not qualifying for it, it won't cause a disruption of the cross-coverage clause of your wife's insurance. Now, your employer offering insurance is a whole other matter, I'd think. Do you happen to know how your wife's insurance qualifies "hardship expenditure" as an exclusion of the cross-coverage clause? 'Cause knowing insurance companies it's probably the world's most conservative definition of hardship.
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 12:49pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 2:10pm
|
Man, your guys insurance plans are ridiculous. My out of pocket is $853/year for a $500 deductible PPO. Obviously my company picks up most of the tab. If I had a wife and kids it would be around $1,200/year. -------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 3:22pm
One thing you need to realize MBro is that you are considerably younger than I am as well. What portion of your insurance is your employer paying? Back in the day, I had an employer paying most of my insurance costs when i was in my 20's. I am surprised it would be that low even with a wife and family because women usually jack up the costs substantially due to the possibility of pregnancies. ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 4:00pm
-------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: scotchyscotch
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 4:05pm
| Just out of interest, How much, (% of earnings wise) do you guys pay for insurance purely for medical? |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 4:42pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 5:42pm
0% -------------
|
Posted By: scotchyscotch
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 6:23pm
| Yeah that question was a bit stupid. I was just think that I pay 20% on any wages over around £7500 ($11,776) for all tax so with "free healthcare" I was wondering how it stacked up compared to you guys. |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 29 June 2012 at 6:44pm
On my last paycheck, I had about 17% taken out for various taxes. This does not include our local school tax and/or property taxes. This was also a low salary check. On my commission checks, quite a bit more is taken out . ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 30 June 2012 at 2:53am
|
I pay 31% tax on any given check between my rate and followed by federal income withholding, Social security, state income, medicare, 401k (self funded retirement my company matches .5% up to 6% of my income, I contribute the max match plus 1%) After that it's my health insurance cost of just slightly over $16/week. I'm sure my insurance falls under the cadillac plan rules and my company is going to pay more taxes because of it. -------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 30 June 2012 at 5:13am
Every 2 weeks, I pay $30.28 for health insurance and $3.28 for Dental which covers me and my wife and kids. In that same pay period, my employer pays $577.63 for health insurance and $62.36 for Dental. ------------- 
|
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 02 July 2012 at 3:30am
|
I just took a ten question quiz on the health care law. I got 10/10 which is better than 99.6% of people that have taken the quiz..... Let me know what you guys get: http://healthreform.kff.org/quizzes/health-reform-quiz/ -------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 02 July 2012 at 12:41pm
|
9/10
Turns out I would have gotten 10 if I had read all of the first question. -------------
|
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 02 July 2012 at 6:32pm
|
2/10 -------------
|
Posted By: RoboCop
Date Posted: 02 July 2012 at 7:38pm
| 9/10 guessing most of it |
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 03 July 2012 at 11:14am
|
10/10 answered correctly. Bi-weekly health insurance for me is $14.42 (for a total of $28.84 a month) with my employer paying $444 a month. If I had a family it'd cost me $240.15 a paycheck ($480.30 a month) with my employer paying $1,142.70. -------------
|