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.
The ACA is a conservative health care law... I'm not surprised at all. It is funny to see so many on the right side of the political spectrum turn against it. Hypocrites much?
Why don't you mention the multiple amendments to the bill that Republicans proposed, all of which were dismissed by the Dems? Republicans had sensible modifications and changes they wanted to make, but Dems wouldn't even consider them. Now, Obama has made scores of changes to a law (changes he does not have the right to make) and it's OK with you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
Nope. The right have been against it from the very start.
The is 100% Dem. Baucus brought the insurance industry on board to write it up.
Passed 100% Dem with not a single Republican vote.
if they arent going to go bankrupt, then why the hell is the President telling them to cut services like cable bills?
Perhaps you don't understand bankruptcy at all... LOL. Ditching your cable / phone bill is hardly bankruptcy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
Nope. The right have been against it from the very start.
The is 100% Dem. Baucus brought the insurance industry on board to write it up.
Passed 100% Dem with not a single Republican vote.
Those are the facts like it or not.
You don't know your history well at all. That is called revisionism. Hilary Clinton opposed the ACA in the 90s because it was the conservative alternative to single-payer, constructed by the conservative Heritage Foundation. This was their premise for the individual mandate.
So now I'm supposed to just believe conservatives of the 90s were just confused? The entire right wing is either a bunch of hypocrites or this country has shifted so far right they can't think straight (it is a little of both).
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
No its not. The Republican plan required individuals to setup PRIVATE individual healthcare savings accounts, not pay taxes so the government has more money.
YOU are the one who doesnt know what you're talking about, just repeating the same old left wing kook lies.
I much like HSAs. That is what I currently have, and what the HDHP style Obamacare is based on. HSA's are far more efficient than traditional PPO plans. Plus, Obamacare is not government controlled health care; it is government regulated health care. There is a very stark difference. The government is not providing the health care.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
Yep, I'm right. You just don't have enough life experience to get what people here are trying to tell you. You are so smug in your ignorance. One day you will see.
What people are trying to tell me is that their personal comforts are more important than the fiscal sustainability of the US health care system. Point taken. Your problem with the ACA is that your personal situation has been changed and you are mad as hell. Before the ACA, you were still paying to subsidize others, so I know that isn't a valid argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
By time he sees, the country will be on its way to a single payer system to repair the damage done by ACA, and he'll be sitting here telling everyone he was correct in his support for single payer, thus moving away from his goalpost of defending the failure ACA is becoming.
Hey Eric, if ACA is so wodnerful why the 3 dozen delays which includes the employer mandate which effects something like 75% of the country or more?
I said on record single-payer is better than the ACA.
Delays are good. Much like a car-recall. Would you rather the system be inefficient or more improved? Admittedly, the delays are due to political pressure. The right-wing propaganda machine has poisoned the ACA so much people spouting about it don't even know the most basic provisions.
Even living with out all the toys and advantages other have, people are not making it.
You can't save any thing if it all is going to living ,buying gas ,food, clothing , car insurance home insurance ,mortgage ,
electricity,water, home heating/cooling, car ,
A lot of folks are on part time jobs and having to live with friends and relatives just to survive.
Jobs like mine left town to other countries and a lot of the folk I worked with are still looking for work any where they can find it.
Fact is a lot of jobs have laid off even more people because that can't afford to for the bill for this ACA.
Beyond that , People that do not make much money are not the ones in health care all the time It's the rich hypochondriac that goes there for the slightest thing. Those and welfare queens.
My son's mother in law is a good example .
She is the exact opposite of the way I raised my family and it drives my son nuts being connected to this mentality.
She and her family are always sick , I mean like ALLL ways sick . except my son . He and His wife are living with his in laws.
And they live in the most sterile atmosphere.
They came from england dependent on the same thing as ACA.
They are not healthier because of it they are sicker, because of it.
Liberals think that because it is free to them it is necessary to take advantage of, taking no responsibility for them selves.
Welfare queens that think the world owes them a living . making more in welfare, than we ever did with both my wife and I working full time.
That's messed up.
It's not afordable care , that is not the goal, the goal is government dependence and raping the rich and giving to the poor that will only abuse it. you and I know it.
Bringing down the middle class (if it even exists any more ), and forcing the wealthy to pay for every one else's health care is wrong.
I'm not rich ,never been never will be , I don't believe the public is responsible for the health care of those that abuse them selves or will abuse the "free" health care.
Besides if it's so great , how come they exempted them selves from it, in congress ?
The hypocrisy of a democrat to tell others to budget their already thin income to accommodate his agenda.
9.5% of your income on health care is not unreasonable at all. Deductibles are rarely met in a given year. Perhaps you should rethink your priorities.
So a person earning $100,000 must spend $9,500 while a person earning $20,000 a year must spend only $1,900? How's that fair again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErikBEggs
Admittedly, It is a tough love response but unfortunately a lot of people in this country need to grow up. Cars, smart phones, cable TV; they are not human necessities. You cannot convince any biologist otherwise.
Are we seeking a life or mere animal-level existence?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErikBEggs
You are pissed because your life won't be as comfortable as it was before. Eventually you will get over it. The law passed, held up in court, and won't be repealed soon.
No, I'm pissed because my comfort will decline while someone else's goes up with no effort on their part to balance the loss on my side.
So a person earning $100,000 must spend $9,500 while a person earning $20,000 a year must spend only $1,900? How's that fair again?
No!!!!! The plan costs $X. It is basically a 2 part test:
If 9.5% of your income is less than the price of the X, the subsidy makes up the difference. The subsidy threshold of giving / receiving = 9.5%. Someone earning $100,000 can pay for it outright, because X is less than 9.5% of their income.
Thank you for proving you have no interest in even reading the provisions included in the law (nor do you care). You simply want to oppose it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Workin_Hard
Are we seeking a life or mere animal-level existence?
So you concede it is comfort / luxury. Got it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Workin_Hard
No, I'm pissed because my comfort will decline while someone else's goes up with no effort on their part to balance the loss on my side.
I have broken down the fiscal argument dozens of times, and feel no need to explain it futher.
The President never said cut household spending to afford health care. A family of three with an income of $36,000 could sign up for a bronze plan for $750 per year. Two 30 year olds could sign up for $1800 per year and a single person with the same income would be about $2400 per year. Is this excessive? All the President said was that people should consider what would happen if they didnt have insurance.
HowTF are millions of low-wage workers going to be able to afford to pay a $6250 max out-of-pocket tab?
Perhaps you don't understand bankruptcy at all... LOL. Ditching your cable / phone bill is hardly bankruptcy.
You don't know your history well at all. That is called revisionism. Hilary Clinton opposed the ACA in the 90s because it was the conservative alternative to single-payer, constructed by the conservative Heritage Foundation. This was their premise for the individual mandate.
So now I'm supposed to just believe conservatives of the 90s were just confused? The entire right wing is either a bunch of hypocrites or this country has shifted so far right they can't think straight (it is a little of both).
I much like HSAs. That is what I currently have, and what the HDHP style Obamacare is based on. HSA's are far more efficient than traditional PPO plans. Plus, Obamacare is not government controlled health care; it is government regulated health care. There is a very stark difference. The government is not providing the health care.
What people are trying to tell me is that their personal comforts are more important than the fiscal sustainability of the US health care system. Point taken. Your problem with the ACA is that your personal situation has been changed and you are mad as hell. Before the ACA, you were still paying to subsidize others, so I know that isn't a valid argument.
I said on record single-payer is better than the ACA.
Delays are good. Much like a car-recall. Would you rather the system be inefficient or more improved? Admittedly, the delays are due to political pressure. The right-wing propaganda machine has poisoned the ACA so much people spouting about it don't even know the most basic provisions.
I call bs on the fact that the mandates were delayed because of political pressure. He lives in fear and being president, he shouldn't be.
Obamacare is not government controlled health care; it is government regulated health care. There is a very stark difference. The government is not providing the health care.
What people are trying to tell me is that their personal comforts are more important than the fiscal sustainability of the US health care system.
Delays are good. Much like a car-recall. Would you rather the system be inefficient or more improved? Admittedly, the delays are due to political pressure.
Obamacare is NOT government controlled? With all the regulations how is this not government control? Saying that there's a difference between government controlled and government regulated is splitting hairs. I see no difference, especially when the IRS is going to play a major role in enforcement and will have access to everyone's bank accounts for EFTs as they see fit.
No, it's not their "personal comforts" that are more important than the fiscal sustainability of the US health care system. It's their FREEDOM that is more important than anything. And the sustainability of the health care system would have been ensured if the legislation had been built with any intelligent thought going into it, instead of the Democrats ramming it through in a hurry as it was done.
As for delays, I don't support them in car recalls, as the example you cite. Recalls should be done immediately so that the product in public hands is safe and effective and works for all. Obamacare simply does not work. It should be "recalled" NOW, and fixed.
The delays are due to elections on the horizon and Dems are running scared. All the provisions that are being delayed are for political reasons; you are correct on that point, but they will all go into effect AFTER elections, being no better for the nation than they would be before.
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.
