Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, when they are asked whether they support "Obamacare," per se. The name has a lot of negative baggage attached to it. However, when the bill is broken out into it's various components, the numbers tell a different story:
Big deal.
Q: Do you support drinking and Driving?
Break it down.
A. Do you support drinking?
B. Do you support driving?
Horrible analogy. Neither drinking nor driving require one another in order to work.
No, but the unconstitutional aspect of Obamacare that neither side likes is required for Obamacare to work.
Sure, people like that those with pre-existing conditions can get insurance. The left hates the idea of the insurance companies benefiting as they want a single payer system and the right hates it because the government can't force people to buy something from a private entity.
Quote:
Coverage for pre-existing conditions doesn't work if you don't have a mandate. People would just not have insurance until they're sick.
I see what you're trying to do, but your point is wrong and the logic you used to try to prove it is patently wrong.
People hav not grown to like Obamacare. I posted the link. Even those who realize that the law is flawed can like certain aspects of it. That is really irrelevant. It's not going to stand simply because people can pick and choose a few parts they like.
You're responding to the post right before yours. You don't need to quote it.
The 'left' isn't some hive mind like the borg on Star Trek. They don't agree on anything any more than those on the right do. There's no universal calling of everyone with left leanings to have a single payer system.
Nothing has been ruled unconstitutional just yet. It's silly to say anything like that until the Supremes have ruled.
I'm not sure if you noticed, but the Democrats passed the healthcare reform. For you to say that they don't want the healthcare reform is yet another logical blunder.
People can pick pieces, but you're missing the main point that several others have pointed out here. I'm not sure if you're trying to be ignorant or just trying to **** people off, but it's an easy concept. I'll capitalize it and use small words so you'll understand.
REQUIRING COVERAGE FOR PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS ONLY WORKS IF PEOPLE HAVE TO BUY INSURANCE. OTHERWISE, PEOPLE WOULD REFUSE TO GET INSURANCE AND THEN JUST BUY IT WHEN THEY GET SICK.
That doesn't work. Make sense? Do you need me to explain that further?
You're responding to the post right before yours. You don't need to quote it.
Thanks, but I'll do as I please.
Quote:
The 'left' isn't some hive mind like the borg on Star Trek. They don't agree on anything any more than those on the right do. There's no universal calling of everyone with left leanings to have a single payer system.
Of course not all fit into a box.
Quote:
Nothing has been ruled unconstitutional just yet. It's silly to say anything like that until the Supremes have ruled.
It will be. The proof is in all of these new plans.
Quote:
I'm not sure if you noticed, but the Democrats passed the healthcare reform. For you to say that they don't want the healthcare reform is yet another logical blunder.
It was never popular. I posted the link.
Quote:
People can pick pieces, but you're missing the main point that several others have pointed out here. I'm not sure if you're trying to be ignorant or just trying to **** people off, but it's an easy concept. I'll capitalize it and use small words so you'll understand.
REQUIRING COVERAGE FOR PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS ONLY WORKS IF PEOPLE HAVE TO BUY INSURANCE. OTHERWISE, PEOPLE WOULD REFUSE TO GET INSURANCE AND THEN JUST BUY IT WHEN THEY GET SICK.
That doesn't work. Make sense? Do you need me to explain that further?
They can like the idea that pre-existing conditions can be covered and still not like the way it was went about. That is what we have. What those such as yourself want is for everyone to just ignore the overall problem because they like a few aspects.
My post is right before yours. That you need to quote 20 parts of it is asinine. Write a post that doesn't make my eyes bleed and I'll address whatever false points you're trying to make.
That said, I'm pretty sure that the whole mandate/pre-existing conditions pair hasn't sunk into your brain. It reminds me of that episode of the Simpsons where Homer goes into witness protection. Remember now, pre-existing conditions can't be covered without a mandate.
Maybe I am naive but isn't liking and wanting to keep certain aspects of the law a sign of bi-partisanship? Isn't bi-partisanship a good thing? It shows that people can actually look beyond their party and make a decision on their own for the people as opposed for their re-election only?
Maybe I am naive but isn't liking and wanting to keep certain aspects of the law a sign of bi-partisanship? Isn't bi-partisanship a good thing? It shows that people can actually look beyond their party and make a decision on their own for the people as opposed for their re-election only?
The real problem with the whole health care debate is the chasm between what is good for the country and what is good for the corporate interests who benefit from our present system.
Right now, the overall cost of health care is approaching 20% of GDP. That is a huge drain on the economy and about twice what other industrialized countries are paying. In return we get good - but not great - healthcare and certainly not better than those other countries. The imperative really has to be to stop healthcare inflation and, if possible, start to get the costs down. In addition, we also need to inject some fairness into the system whereby taxpayers are not picking up the bad health risks while insurance companies get to make profit from the good risks.
The debate over Obamacare has been dominated by special interest groups trying to protect their profits. In California alone, Insurers, hospitals, physicians and other health care groups spent $35.7 million on lobbying while, nationwide, that number is $237.4 million. These are the numbers for 2011. While the health care industry is able to protect their profits, they have no incentive to manage down costs which is one of the reasons your insurance premiums go up year on year while, at the same time, more of your tax dollars get sucked into paying for those who cannot get insured.
I wish we did have a true bipartisan approach. The more so in that the GOP position is not substantively different to Obamacare. Unfortunately, too many of our politicians have been bought and sold by the health care lobby.
Maybe I am naive but isn't liking and wanting to keep certain aspects of the law a sign of bi-partisanship? Isn't bi-partisanship a good thing? It shows that people can actually look beyond their party and make a decision on their own for the people as opposed for their re-election only?
The distinction there is that one sided wanted none of this passed at all and did everything in their power to stop all of it. Had they shown the bi-partisanship we saw in the 90's with the Freshman Class and Slick Willie, the bill would have been much better.
The Republicans want to keep certain elements because they're popular. They're faced with their own catch-22 though. The most popular elements don't work without a coverage mandate.
My post is right before yours. That you need to quote 20 parts of it is asinine. Write a post that doesn't make my eyes bleed and I'll address whatever false points you're trying to make.
That said, I'm pretty sure that the whole mandate/pre-existing conditions pair hasn't sunk into your brain. It reminds me of that episode of the Simpsons where Homer goes into witness protection. Remember now, pre-existing conditions can't be covered without a mandate.
Of course we can. We could create a system and pay for it with all the money we have and continue to waste in other countries.
Other countries have health insurance that covers these conditions all without forcing people to buy something from a private for profit company.
So, tell me again how something can't be done that is already being done in many places.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
