Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-19-2010, 06:07 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,868 posts, read 24,399,838 times
Reputation: 8672

Advertisements

I've been crunching the numbers a bit.

The Senate bill would expand medicare (aka, publicly funded health insurance) to those who make 133% above the poverty level.

The Average single in America makes about 11,000 a year at the poverty level. The average family of fours poverty level is about 23,000 dollars.

Now, if you see what 133% of those numbers are, that means if you are single, and make less than 15,000 a year, your insurance is now paid for. If you are in a family of four, and your income is less than 30,000 a year, you and your entire families healthcare is paid for.

Thats almost 50% of all Americans. At the very least, its 40% of all Americans. And thats the conservative Senate plan. The House plan would cover everyone up to 150% of the poverty line.

Republicans can't run to overturn the healthcare bill later, or they would instantly loose the election. You can't sit there and tell me, if someone is giving you free health insurance, that you didn't have before, you wouldn't vote against anyone who ran on taking that away.

They also can't allow it to pass, because those folks would feel entitled to vote for the party that passed such a reform, and since the current President is a Democrat, they'd feel completely loyal to him.

Democrats are fighting so hard for it, for the exact same reason. It would secure Democrats at least a 41% Senate ratio. That at least keeps them in the law making game forever.

So this is the real reason, why Republicans are so dead set against the bill. Its not the money spent on it, its nothing to do with a since of "small government" its to save their party from defeat in elections, well, forever.

And here's the thing Republicans aren't telling you about the Mass Senate race. Sure, if their guy wins, they'll have 41 seats in the Senate, and they can fillibuster.

But the bill has already passed the Senate. All the house has to do, is pass the Senate bill, as it stands right now. So really, the 41'st seat is really pointless at this point. You aren't going to tell me that the house won't pass the Senate bill TO THE LETTER if it means they pass a bill that secures them 50% to 40% of all Americans votes.

Thats the real reason why Republicans are against the bill, and the reason why Democrats are so dead set on passing it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-19-2010, 06:14 PM
 
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
5,224 posts, read 5,014,623 times
Reputation: 908
Great post
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2010, 06:17 PM
 
2,087 posts, read 1,767,255 times
Reputation: 262
nothing to do with health care "reform" has ever been anything but political.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2010, 06:35 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
5,680 posts, read 11,551,112 times
Reputation: 1915
Why does "healthcare reform" necessarily have to equate with an entirely new system? Why not just provide tax credits so lower income people can buy their own, and allow interstate insurance competition, which will lower rates? And, include some things from the present reform bill, including eliminating waiting periods and pre-existing condition clauses, etc?

BTW - it IS also about the money. The gov't will have to print billions & billions more non-existant money to cover all this, and that will make our currency worthless. Guess what that means?? Inflation - get ready to pay WAY more for everything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2010, 06:53 PM
Bub
 
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
235 posts, read 380,709 times
Reputation: 83
Unfortunately...for the Dems, they will forever "own" this healthcare as their headache if it is a money pit that produces poor care...

NEVER FORGET: You are getting MANDATORY INSURANCE...NOT Healthcare.. let me know when we wake up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2010, 06:56 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
8,998 posts, read 14,792,249 times
Reputation: 3550
I know some Democrats who hate this bill.
They, like myself, would rather have single-payer.

Health insurance doesn't equal health care by the way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2010, 06:58 PM
 
31 posts, read 26,607 times
Reputation: 22
No, Republicans are against it because they like to keep the money they earn and not pay for health insurance for deadbeats that refuse to work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2010, 07:01 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
8,998 posts, read 14,792,249 times
Reputation: 3550
Quote:
Originally Posted by batman14 View Post
No, Republicans are against it because they like to keep the money they earn and not pay for health insurance for deadbeats that refuse to work.
Riiiight because jobs are growing on trees and PLENTY of jobs are offering affordable health insurance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2010, 07:01 PM
Bub
 
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
235 posts, read 380,709 times
Reputation: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by batman14 View Post
No, Republicans are against it because they like to keep the money they earn and not pay for health insurance for deadbeats that refuse to work.
Not all of them...I wont EVER deny a child healthcare.... and not all the Dems are ready to hand over all their cash either.

But it doesnt matter..because again..it is only insurance, not healthcare it is not the same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2010, 07:07 PM
 
2,087 posts, read 1,767,255 times
Reputation: 262
Quote:
Originally Posted by UpstateBooster View Post
Why does "healthcare reform" necessarily have to equate with an entirely new system? Why not just provide tax credits so lower income people can buy their own, and allow interstate insurance competition, which will lower rates? And, include some things from the present reform bill, including eliminating waiting periods and pre-existing condition clauses, etc?

BTW - it IS also about the money. The gov't will have to print billions & billions more non-existant money to cover all this, and that will make our currency worthless. Guess what that means?? Inflation - get ready to pay WAY more for everything.


there is already money spent on healthcare that will not be spent under the new system though.......but either way the bills are crap and don't actually give help to millions of maericans who do need the help.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:12 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top