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.
I see several posts in here that attack Romney and ignore this horrendous lie.
What kind of defense of this action by those supporting Obama is that?
That's because you missed the main point of the ad: there are thousands of workers who, after they lose their jobs, also lose their healthcare coverage. And then if sickness strikes, you are in a financial deep hole. The ad is meant to illustrate such a particular case.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,461,442 times
Reputation: 6670
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaybu
That's because you missed the main point of the ad: there are thousands of workers who, after they lose their jobs, also lose their healthcare coverage. And then if sickness strikes, you are in a financial deep hole. The ad is meant to illustrate such a particular case.
But to appreciate that would require something the Right is totally lacking and worse, hasn't a clue what it means... which is "empathy".
That's because you missed the main point of the ad: there are thousands of workers who, after they lose their jobs, also lose their healthcare coverage. And then if sickness strikes, you are in a financial deep hole. The ad is meant to illustrate such a particular case.
Obamacare does not fix this. If you lose your job you still are not going to be able to afford insurance and on top of that you get fined.
That's because you missed the main point of the ad: there are thousands of workers who, after they lose their jobs, also lose their healthcare coverage. And then if sickness strikes, you are in a financial deep hole. The ad is meant to illustrate such a particular case.
Yes, like if you worked at a GM dealership, coal fired-electric plant, coal mine, or off-shore oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico that Obama shut down.
Then to rub salt in the wound, Obama would tax you for not having that coverage.
Wow we really have not mastered the basics of Obamacare have we? If you don't have a job and you can't afford any insurance you won't be fined.
So MILLIONS more people will now be getting free health care, not paying a fine, nor paying any taxes......and THAT is ALSO supposed to keep health care costs down?
Plus...we need to make sure illegal aliens can get that free stuff too.
Wow we really have not mastered the basics of Obamacare have we? If you don't have a job and you can't afford any insurance you won't be fined.
The argument is that there are people walking into E.R.'s daily with no health insurance and taxpayers are picking up the tab and that has to stop.
Under the situation you note, taxpayers are still picking up the tab. Nothing fixed.
Now you assumed that this person can't find another job (granted a decent assumption today) but who is to say that the job he found has insurance coverage?
So he is working but had to take a job that is a step down. He can't afford insurance. Either he is fined (taxed) or taxpayers pick up the costs.
The argument is that there are people walking into E.R.'s daily with no health insurance and taxpayers are picking up the tab and that has to stop.
Under the situation you note, taxpayers are still picking up the tab. Nothing fixed.
Now you assumed that this person can't find another job (granted a decent assumption today) but who is to say that the job he found has insurance coverage?
So he is working but had to take a job that is a step down. He can't afford insurance. Either he is fined (taxed) or taxpayers pick up the costs.
This is NOT a solution to the problem.
Absolutely true.
Plus, many companies that NOW offer health care, are going to dump it because Obama has created a situation where the big health insurance companies won't be able to compete with the government's plan (subsidized by taxpayers).
In less than 2 decades, your health care will be like the DVM.
Canada is already crying that their system is unsustainable and people cannot get a primary care physician. They hold lotteries in some town for a doctor. And their Canadian Supreme Court has ruled that "access to a waiting list is not access to health care".
The argument is that there are people walking into E.R.'s daily with no health insurance and taxpayers are picking up the tab and that has to stop.
Under the situation you note, taxpayers are still picking up the tab. Nothing fixed.
Now you assumed that this person can't find another job (granted a decent assumption today) but who is to say that the job he found has insurance coverage?
So he is working but had to take a job that is a step down. He can't afford insurance. Either he is fined (taxed) or taxpayers pick up the costs.
This is NOT a solution to the problem.
Nope, you still haven't mastered the basics of Obamacare. A person with so little income they can't afford any insurance would probably now be on Medicaid (unless the state refuses Federal funds, which a few have decided to do). People on Medicaid are at least able to see a regular doctor and get preventative care, preventing at least catastrophic (and expensive) medical emergencies. The people who could afford insurance and just never got it, are more burdensome to the system and they are the ones who would be fined. It certainly is not a perfect solution, but remind me, what exactly was the Republican proposal?
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.
