Supreme Court Upholds "Obamacare!"

Post Reply New Topic

How so? In Universal Healthcare the healthcare is not a product it is a public service....its nothing like the government forcing people to purchase private health insurance.

I think it very well can be a first step toward socialized healthcare.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I suspect some right-wing lunatic will try to assassinate chief justice John Roberts. That traitor! They're going to go absolutely bonkers if Obama wins in November. The Republicans will try to impeach Obama if he wins. You have my word on that.

There is a range of circumstances where you don't have to buy insurance. One is if you are below 133% of the poverty level (maybe 18k for a single in 2014). Also, the idea is that subsidized, sometimes heavily subsidized, insurance will be available on the exchanges. It will be cheaper than today and good preventative coverage is mandated.

If you are under 30 you can get a catastrophic only policy that will just keep you from bankrupting yourself (and having others pay for your care).

Last edited by simon_says on 28 Jun 2012, 10:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

Let's not forget there are many in our country and around the world who would just like to have some kind of healthcare no matter what adjective one puts in front. I'm not a diehard liberal, but it is the 21st Century and the US is the greatest nation on earth, so we are told, therefore, we should lead by showing the world healthcare is a human right/necessity.

How is forcing people to purchase private health insurance or making them pay more taxes a move towards socialized healthcare...sounds more like a move towards the government forcing people to buy products. I mean if I had my way there would not be 'insurance' there would be Universal Healthcare and everyone would be subject to quality treatment.....not having to go through the middleman or insurance company who can decide not to cover your medical costs even though you are paying for their services for pretty much any reason they see fit.

I mean why should someone pay higher taxes or a fine to the IRS as they prefer to call it since apparently tax is a dirty word for not purchasing a product from the private sector. Maybe the insurance companies should pay a higher tax for everyone who decides not to purchase it. Also I can see how the requirement for an employer to buy insurance for their employees could hurt small local buisinesses. I mean because it doesn't matter if they can't afford the cost they either have to pay a fine or buy the insurance.....even if the employees are quite fine without the insurance.

For once tho, it is George W Bush's fault.

And how do you think that public service is funded?

Well not to bring you down any but some countries already have Universal Healthcare, so technically even if the U.S went that direction we'd not be 'leading' the rest of the world, that would be those countries that already have Universal Healthcare. I guess the U.S is not the greatest nation on earth after all.

Nope, they only struck down one of the good parts of the bill, the part requiring states to expand medicaid coverage to all people who cannot possibly afford private insurance beginning in 2014.

Taxes....duh, you see my issue is not with taxation in general it is with things like taxation without representation or taxing people too high. But the whole point would be they aren't paying for private healthcare, just general taxes like everyone already pays and would have access to healthcare treatment. It has to balance out though........otherwise it does not work.

There would be no raising of taxes due to not buying a product from the private market....in such a system I can grantee that.

So....if you have no health insurance, and you don't meet the income requirement to be forced to buy it, then you'll continue to receive no healthcare. Wow, that will really help a lot of people.

Right. They didnt quite strike the Medicaid expansion down from what I'm seeing. They said states can opt out.

So some states will cover the poor, some will not. Interesting to see how that works.

The Supreme Court ruled that its a tax and that taxation is something that's Congress's jurisdiction. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out now, whether it will put more wind in Romney's sails to void it when he hits office or whether the jeers of "Republicans republicans republicans witchhunt republicans republicans can't handle failure republicans republicans republicans" from certain parts of the media will cancel that out. Regardless I won't let politics boil my blood anymore when I'm realizing its as stupid as letting a bunch of country club pro athletes raise your blood pressure (and if we end up on universal healthcare that becomes and even worse proposition).

You mean tyrannical communist/fascist healthcare.

It seems to some people here the government making anyone do anything is tyrannical. Nevermind that real tyrannical governments don't put nearly as much effort into forcing people do things to advance the common good (such as social safety nets or healthcare) as they put into purging all dissenters from government and locking up people who publicly express disagreement with government. The healthcare bill is not tyrannical because people who disagree with it can easily vote for Republicans who have pledged to repeal it. Nobody is preventing them from doing that.

No, just a raising of taxes in general. Why does it matter whether the gov't forces you to buy healthcare by levying a fine, or if they force you through raising your taxes? Either way the gov't is still forcing you to purchase a product.