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)
View Poll Results: Do you support and/or would sign up for it?
Yes, it would be a viable option and I would sign up 11 29.73%
Yes, it would be a viable option but I would not sign up (happy with current plan or Obama's) 7 18.92%
Not sure 1 2.70%
No, It's not a good option 18 48.65%
Voters: 37. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-30-2011, 09:33 PM
 
24,832 posts, read 37,327,610 times
Reputation: 11538

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rush Fan View Post
The adults, who just took the House from the children, are working on the opt out provision. It's called REPEAL.
At least they can defund it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-30-2011, 09:43 PM
 
9,879 posts, read 8,014,556 times
Reputation: 2521
Quote:
Originally Posted by wehotex View Post
That wouldn't work. You have to have a large pool of healthy ppl to counterbalance all of the sick ppl in the system.. without that, the system is doomed to fail. If ppl could refuse to participate, they would still end up not paying when they had any issues. Our crazy American laws say that emergencies MUST be treated. There would be too many deadbeats that would not pay at all or pay very slowly.
And that's why the mandate should never have been
passed in the first place - let those who don't want to participate opt out and get private insurance. Have Medicare for all through employee payroll tax. The dire hards who want to be ripped off by insurance companies that take up to 30 percent for administrative costs/profits/advertising instead of actually going to health care can have at it - if they want it. That seems the most
logical to me. The whole bill was done backwards I think.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2011, 09:46 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,647 posts, read 26,361,465 times
Reputation: 12648
Quote:
Originally Posted by Driller1 View Post
What will hurt Fred is when his suppers raise their prices because of the law.

Fred will pay more and maybe by less stock to sell.

Now, maybe Fred can raise his prices but, that could hurt him with his customers.

Remember, his customers are now paying more for everything.


I wonder if Home Depot and Lowes are able to "opt-out"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2011, 11:12 PM
 
Location: Chandler, AZ
5,800 posts, read 6,564,313 times
Reputation: 3151
Yes--allow everybody to have an HSA with the ability to roll over any unused amount to the next calendar year, be free to buy insurance which suits their specific needs from anywhere in the USA, and be able to write off 100% of your medical expenses, as your employer is allowed to do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2011, 11:54 PM
 
570 posts, read 882,171 times
Reputation: 539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill61 View Post
The fact that so many don't have it now is what costs the rest of us an arm and a leg to insure ourselves.
Do you really believe that cost will go down when you are forced to buy a product/service?

I don't think you went to college, but if you did, you would notice that classes REQUIRE you to buy a product, in this case a textbook.

Have you ever bought a book that cost more than a college textbook? Most likely not, since the other books you buy that are not required, are left to a free market system where the seller needs to adjust the price to what the consumer would actually pay.

Last edited by gallowsCalibrator; 01-31-2011 at 11:13 AM.. Reason: Discuss topic, not poster.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2011, 12:00 AM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,251,465 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by TempesT68 View Post
With the passing of the historic health care bill, many on the right are complaining and trying to repeal it, citing issues such as not wanting to be "forced" to obtain healthcare. Instead of Boehner and the republicans wasting tax payer time and money trying to repeal the bill, would you support, or sign up for a bill that would let you opt out of healthcare completely? This would mean if you choose to sign up, you would be ineligible and not treated for any healthcare related issues including emergency room visits or other emergency situations unless you can pay cash in full up front.
This appears like it could be a more viable option than trying to repeal or alter a plan that many agree with, also to save taxpayer funds on unpaid medical bills and those who simply don't want to be treated.
I couldn't find a viable choice in your options. The reason is that the finiing of those who don't have health care is such a heavy part of the collection of money for the system to work. Do you remember the money they are to pay if they don't have insurance.

This just reminded me about something I have been wanting to ask you Obama folk for some time. What are those exchanges you keep talking about? I heard the Dems talking about them early on but just haven't seen any of them in force. Maybe my Red state just hasn't got around to that part of the law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2011, 12:13 AM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,251,465 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Last I heard twenty-six states were exercising their opt-out option in court, and the House was exercising its option to defund it. What is there to negotiate?

Actually, conservatives are hoping against all hope the twenty-three Democrats in the Senate who come up for reelection in 2012 will vote against repeal. Either way, on this one, we win and you lose.
If the Dems are so sure that all of their people in the Senate will vote against Repeal I wonder why they don't allow it to be voted on. I am sure that Dirty Harry doesn't really think he can control his voters in the Senate and therefore he has to keep it from coming up for a vote. Well he can vote Up or Down and then use the filibuster to keep it from being approved. He has even said he will do just that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2011, 12:20 AM
 
Location: Arizona
13,778 posts, read 9,656,877 times
Reputation: 7485
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
If the Dems are so sure that all of their people in the Senate will vote against Repeal I wonder why they don't allow it to be voted on. I am sure that Dirty Harry doesn't really think he can control his voters in the Senate and therefore he has to keep it from coming up for a vote. Well he can vote Up or Down and then use the filibuster to keep it from being approved. He has even said he will do just that.
Obama will veto any vote that is passed. Tough cheese.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2011, 12:47 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,647 posts, read 26,361,465 times
Reputation: 12648
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
Obama will veto any vote that is passed. Tough cheese.


That's what I keep hoping will happen, and the closer to November 2012 the better.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2011, 01:51 AM
 
10,875 posts, read 13,805,242 times
Reputation: 4896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rush Fan View Post
The adults, who just took the House from the children, are working on the opt out provision. It's called REPEAL.
Which will never happen as the real adults still have the senate and the presidency. They would filibuster anything that the children from the house brought up, or even just for laughs let it go to the president so he can veto and make a complete embarrassment out of the right. Again that's the point of the discussion. Many, almost all on the right are raising a stink about people who can not afford or denied because of pre-existing conditions can now get healthcare. The option would give these people a complete opt-out, absolutely no care what-so-ever unless you can pay for it all yourself. It seems like the perfect "less government!" proposal the right are howling about.
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:08 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