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.
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.
yeah buddy keep dreaming. Insurance is not affordable for people working their butts off either. Ever priced decent insurance on the open market? how does 900+ a month plus 1000 per person deductible and than 70% coverage sound? Great huh really affordable.
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.
Aren't the Democrats so quick to point out, "Social Security was our idea" "Medicare was our idea"
Well both programs are broken, almost beyond repair, and the Democrats have lost several elections since then.
When I saw the title of this thread I thought, "Hmmm...I wonder what kind of quotes or numbers are going to be presented. I wonder what definitions will be used. I wonder what legislation or congressmen will be used for examples."
But, alas, it's just another armchair politician making judgment calls.
According to those figures, I would fall in to the "free healthcare" category.
And ya know what? I don't want it and I WILL vote out any of my representatives that voted to "give" it to me.
1. Because it's not 'free', and
2. Because I shouldn't be mandated to pay for my neighbor's 'free healthcare' while I'm being forced to pay for my own.
THAT is the 'real reason' why I'm against this piece of legislation.
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.
First, I'd like you to back up your numbers with a source.
Second, WHY are the democrats rushing this bill through? I'm sure it's the best thing since sliced bread, enabling every person in America to a very cheap health-care, that will drop the unemployment to zero and instantly fix the US economy. But why are democrats not making the bill public?
Here is an editorial piece of WSJ discussing Harry Reid's plan:
First, I'd like you to back up your numbers with a source.
Second, WHY are the democrats rushing this bill through? I'm sure it's the best thing since sliced bread, enabling every person in America to a very cheap health-care, that will drop the unemployment to zero and instantly fix the US economy. But why are democrats not making the bill public?
Here is an editorial piece of WSJ discussing Harry Reid's plan:
Aren't the Democrats so quick to point out, "Social Security was our idea" "Medicare was our idea"
Well both programs are broken, almost beyond repair, and the Democrats have lost several elections since then.
When I saw the title of this thread I thought, "Hmmm...I wonder what kind of quotes or numbers are going to be presented. I wonder what definitions will be used. I wonder what legislation or congressmen will be used for examples."
But, alas, it's just another armchair politician making judgment calls.
According to those figures, I would fall in to the "free healthcare" category.
And ya know what? I don't want it and I WILL vote out any of my representatives that voted to "give" it to me.
1. Because it's not 'free', and
2. Because I shouldn't be mandated to pay for my neighbor's 'free healthcare' while I'm being forced to pay for my own.
THAT is the 'real reason' why I'm against this piece of legislation.
Well, if you fall into those numbers, then you can get free medicare.
And yes, Dems are happy to point out they started Social Security, and they are happy to point out they started medicare.
What happened in 2008, after the last Republican President tried "tinkering" with Social Security, thats right, his party lost, BIG.
Some things you don't want to mess with, peoples money (ssi) and peoples health insurance (medicare)
So yeah, the Dems welcome this bill. They will secure their place in Government for a loooong time with this one. And Republicans will be able to do nothing without it. I wouldn't be surprised if Republicans don't pass a bill similar to the Dems, if given the chance, and the credit.
yeah buddy keep dreaming. Insurance is not affordable for people working their butts off either. Ever priced decent insurance on the open market? how does 900+ a month plus 1000 per person deductible and than 70% coverage sound? Great huh really affordable.
What does that 900+ mo policy cover?
One reason insurance is not affordable is because the healthy young workers chose not to purchase a policy. This makes the pool of insurance buyers smaller raising the prices for all of those who are paying.
Second reason, is goverment regulation. Government mandates min levels of coverage on the state level, which prevents insurers from doing business across state lines. This limits a choice for you and me, resulting in higher premiums.
That's why, the solution is not MORE regulation, but DE-regulation, allowing me to buy 400K/year policy that only covers medical procedures over 10K (as an example). This will undoubtedly lower the premiums and make it more affordable. You'll be able to pay for routine doc visits, while knowing that you are covered should something catastrophic (God forbid) happens.
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.
Many lefties (being one is not dependent on being a Dem by the way) support health industry reform, they just DON'T support THIS bill which is a private industry bailout.
Many lefties (being one is not dependent on being a Dem by the way) support health industry reform, they just DON'T support THIS bill which is a private industry bailout.
Agreed.
I've said this in previous threads.
It's just a bailout for health insurance companies and Big Pharma.
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?
Because the current system is broken and is not business friendly. In fact, health insurance costs make it very hard to do business in this country. Also, the current system takes too much discretionary income from consumers. Without a strong consumer base this country becomes Mexico. BTW, the current legislation sucks and is just subsiding a shameless business.
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.
Yawn....yet ANOTHER "healthcare" debate
