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)
 
Old 04-03-2012, 06:59 AM
 
Location: it depends
6,369 posts, read 6,424,967 times
Reputation: 6388

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristineVA View Post
Except that, as they say, that horse is out of the barn.

Try reforming health care back to the way it was. The insurance lobbyists are too strong. We will never have $50 doctor visits again, either. My last visit, for a sore throat with no lab tests was $176.00.
Health care costs are out of whack because five decades of government money flooding the system has produced the predictable results. And employer-provided health insurance has masked these effects from the consumer. Every part of health care that is NOT typically insured or part of government benefits has worked well in the normal action of a relatively free market. Vision correction surgery, for example, has done nothing but get better and better over the years, with stable or declining costs.

When the government pays $2200 for $400 wheelchairs, they make it difficult to find $400 wheelchairs for $400. When the government provides eye exams and eyeglasses every six months to the indigent, they make it more expensive for everybody else to afford eye exams and eyeglasses every two or four years. When the government will pay unlimited amounts of money for expensive surgery of questionable value on people who are 80 or 90 years old, they make it difficult for people to afford their own health care AND carry the cost of the government spending.

That horse may be out of the barn, but it is imperative that it is corralled and put back in the barn. If you want to have a mandate, then mandate that everyone has to pay copays and deductibles for everything. Encourage high deductible health insurance instead of outlawing it. Promote transparency in pricing. Let the states experiment with Medicaid. Get rid of the mandated expenses in health insurance--let people buy the amounts and kinds of coverage they want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-03-2012, 07:00 AM
 
45,304 posts, read 26,567,165 times
Reputation: 25056
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
1) Nobody is being forced at "gun-point." There is a fine. Governments levy fines.
What if I dont/can't pay the fine?
Governments accomplish all that they do by threat of violence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
2) The individual mandate was a Republican idea from the 1990s. It was championed by the conservative Heritage Foundation.

So, unless your suggesting that the GOP and the Heritage Foundation are Communist also, your argument has no merit.
I'm suggesting that the GOP and DNC arent all that different in this regard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 07:00 AM
 
Location: DFW
40,992 posts, read 49,359,544 times
Reputation: 55100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tall_Rep View Post
This guy is DANGEROUS. It's time the people of this country woke up
He is Dangerous but may be able to buy enough uneducated votes with the promises of more welfare, amnesty and free benefits that he could very well buy his way into another term.

I wonder if he does get reelected, at what point he tries to over turn the 2 term limits. Surely he'll need another 8-12 years to turn us completely socialist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 07:01 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,987,397 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcopolo View Post
Health care costs are out of whack because five decades of government money flooding the system has produced the predictable results.
Then, why is it that government funded health care all over Europe is 1/2 the cost of private insurance in the U.S.?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 07:01 AM
jw2
 
2,028 posts, read 3,273,405 times
Reputation: 3387
Everything Obama says between now and November is for his campaign. Everything.

As for the court, the most outspoken liberal judge speaks more about the practically of the law (forcing everybody to buy insurance prevents an unfair burden on those that voluntarily do). While that may be true and a valid point, the job of the Supreme Court is to decide if a law is constitutional.

As for Obama's declaration that the law received the support of the democratically elected congress (which is a subject in itself but will accept that as true) the concerns of the Supreme Court are not whether most people want it, it is whether the law is constitutional.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 07:04 AM
 
16,431 posts, read 22,244,079 times
Reputation: 9628
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
After Obama sullied the Supremes during th SOTU address, i'd say what he has coming to him is well deserved.
I really do believe they're above petty paybacks. They are deliberating on the merits of the question as to the constitutionality of the mandate. It's not "playing politics" to declare an un-constitutional mandate un-constitutional. It's calling a horse a horse. That Obama doesn't like his beloved prize pony being called a horse is understandable, but that's just the way it is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 07:04 AM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,537,824 times
Reputation: 9074
It's all political, he's speaking to his base which is currently demoralized. After the decision is announced, he can say the Court made an outrageous error and hope his base gets angry enough to bail him out.

That's a losing strategy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 07:05 AM
 
Location: #
9,598 posts, read 16,595,867 times
Reputation: 6324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tall_Rep View Post
This just shows what the mentality of this president is....the Supreme court will rule according to the rule of LAW and the CONSTITUTION....and that shows just EXACTLY what obama thinks about the constitution. He has...and always will....view it as an OBSTACLE....something to be circumvented....an 'inconvenience'.

This guy is DANGEROUS. It's time the people of this country woke up
Actually, you are wrong. There is plenty of precedent to pass this legislation.
Precedents for upholding health care law - CNN.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 07:06 AM
 
Location: #
9,598 posts, read 16,595,867 times
Reputation: 6324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakin View Post
He is Dangerous but may be able to buy enough uneducated votes with the promises of more welfare, amnesty and free benefits that he could very well buy his way into another term.

I wonder if he does get reelected, at what point he tries to over turn the 2 term limits. Surely he'll need another 8-12 years to turn us completely socialist.
If this happened and he kept on getting reelected, would you admit that your way of thinking is out of the mainstream? Or would you say "Americans are stupid"; the usual conservative mantra when their ideals are seen as less than ideal?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2012, 07:07 AM
 
13,718 posts, read 9,052,864 times
Reputation: 10459
I admit I am of two minds about this matter.

On the one hand, I have grave concerns about the use of the Commerce Clause to create an individual mandate to obtain health insurance.

On the other hand, you learn in law school that, historically, the Supreme Court gives 'great deference' to Acts of Congress.

After all, in the past when the Supreme Court interpreted some law or reached a result that Congress did not like, the remedy was for Congress to forthwith pass a bill (signed, of course, by the presiding President, or else over-riding a veto) that 'over ruled' the Court.

Yet, if the Court truly believes that Congress was overstepping its bounds, then the Court should strike said law down. After all, if Congress passes a Bill that restricts freedom of speech, we would hope that the Court would say said Bill does not pass Constitutional muster.

Of course, I do want all of these uninsured people to get insurance so I don't have to keep footing the bill for their treatment. Yet, I guess in the end the Court will strike down at least the individual mandate. I shall keep on paying for the freeloaders.

Who will be rejoicing? Said freeloaders and Republicans. That seems like an odd pairing.
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 10:03 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