Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Supreme Court Upholds "Obamacare!"

Page 3 of 14 [ 210 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 14  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 122
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

28 Jun 2012, 11:16 am

YippySkippy wrote:
Sorry, CNN was reporting incorrect information on their website. Now they have changed their headline. :?
Yes, Obamacare has been upheld.


That's what happens when CNN gets its information from Fox.



YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

28 Jun 2012, 11:20 am

Quote:
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


The government (ideally) has an interest in the welfare of its citizens. There is an expectation of morality/ethics.
Private companies exist only to make money.
The issue isn't the method of payment, it is the nature of the product.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

28 Jun 2012, 11:20 am

marshall wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
HOO! HOO!
Now the only thing better would be for everyone to be covered by Medicare, and give us real universal healthcare.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Somehow I don't think this bill is going to lead to anything good like that...


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

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


You mean tyrannical communist/fascist healthcare. :lol:

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.


I'd say more just fascist, as communism would not allow for health insurance anyways due to universal healthcare it would have.

I think making someone pay a higher tax or a fine for not purchasing a product from the private market is BS, I mean who really benefits? The citizens of this country? I think not.

Also come on you really think the Republicans are opposite of the Democrats and genuinely want to help americans.......come on both the major political parties are full of corruption and not trustworthy. I would think considering we switch from democrat to republican election after election only to find it really doesn't matter what side you vote for we still have the same Federal Government and its still the corrupt and very wealthy in charge.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

28 Jun 2012, 11:23 am

JWC wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
JWC wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
JWC wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
YippySkippy wrote:
This sets a precedent that the government may force people to purchase ANYTHING.
It's a terrible decision. What we need is socialized healthcare.


Exactly.


Socialized healthcare still involves the government forcing people to purchase healthcare.


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.


And how do you think that public service is funded?


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.


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.


No you aren't understanding I am talking about Universal Healthcare....it is not a product one 'buys' it is a public service people have access to......I mean the whole point of paying taxes is having public services everyone benefits from I see nothing wrong with that. Also I never said taxes had to be raised and too much raising of taxes would be a bad idea.

If you want to turn this into a 'taxation is wrong' debate I am not very interested.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Arizona

28 Jun 2012, 11:24 am

marshall wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
HOO! HOO!
Now the only thing better would be for everyone to be covered by Medicare, and give us real universal healthcare.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Somehow I don't think this bill is going to lead to anything good like that...


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

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


You mean tyrannical communist/fascist healthcare. :lol:

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.


There is only the illusion of dissent. Do you really think the guy who inspired the law will repeal it? Give me a brake. The corporations run both parties.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

28 Jun 2012, 11:27 am

simon_says wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
It's also in the face of all american citizens in general...since from my understanding that bill has something in it about being required to purchase health insurance well I can't afford it so it may have been better before when its not required by law.

As far as I am concerned the Republicans and Democrats are both a scam...I doubt either would come up with a good healthcare plan.


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).


Ok but why should people be forced to pay health insurance companies? I would like Universal Healthcare but this bill just seems like it could lead to some more disturbing regulations....also all that seems to be mandated is if someone has a pre-existing condition the health insurance company cannot reject them.....but there is nothing about ensuring they actually help with the persons medical costs rather then finding any reason they can to make them pay out of pocket.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 122
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

28 Jun 2012, 11:27 am

Jacoby wrote:
Yay! We can all pay more for health insurance! Those insurance executives weren't rich enough! Hopefully the SWAT team they send to my house for not being able to pay this 'tax' doesn't kill my dog before sending me to their rape cage.


Sorry, but you're way out of line, once again.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/janetnovack ... ike-a-tax/

Quote:
It does not apply to individuals who do not pay federal income taxes because their household income is less than the filing threshold in the Internal Revenue Code...

Roberts concludes the mandate functions more like a tax than the “penalty” for not buying insurance the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act labels it as, because in most cases “the amount due will be far less than the price of insurance,’’ and the IRS is “not allowed to use those means most suggestive of a punitive sanction, such as criminal prosecution,’’ to enforce it.

Moreover, he writes, “taxes that seek to influence conduct are nothing new”. For example, “federal and state taxes can compose more than half the retail price of cigarettes, not just to raise more money, but to encourage people to quit smoking.’’ He notes the court has also upheld “such obviously regulatory measures as taxes on selling marijuana and sawed-off shotguns.”


You've been listening to Repubnican propaganda without verifying, once again.

Romney's supporters all have health insurance, and absolutely nothing to worry about.

Those of you who are too poor to pay federal income taxes and also don't want health insurance similarly have absolutely nothing to worry about.

The Repubnican Party is simply trying to get you all riled up over nothing, and their ability to succeed at this will determine their chances to place Mitt Romney in the White House.



YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

28 Jun 2012, 11:27 am

Quote:
Also come on you really think the Republicans are opposite of the Democrats and genuinely want to help americans.......come on both the major political parties are full of corruption and not trustworthy. I would think considering we switch from democrat to republican election after election only to find it really doesn't matter what side you vote for we still have the same Federal Government and its still the corrupt and very wealthy in charge.


The two-party system exists to divide the citizenry. While we are squabbling amongst ourselves, the corporations are quietly (though more and more brazenly as they consolidate their power) pulling all the strings.



TalksToCats
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2012
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 255
Location: UK

28 Jun 2012, 11:28 am

I've been wanting to ask about this for a while and this seems the right thread to do it.

Ok, as someone who lives in the UK, a country which has universal public healthcare, I really struggle to understand why so many people in the US don't seem to want it. The UK NHS has its' failings, and it certainly does have to ration healthcare to ensure it is shared out as fairly as possible, but I think it's a really good thing and can't understand why many in the US don't seem to want something like it.

First off, I need to explain that I am almost certainly liberal, a social democrat (but not a communist) and probably tending towards agreeing with quite a lot things most Green parties are for.

My political standpoint means that I think that some level of state intervention and regulation is a good thing, and that there are certain public goods that I think it is useful and right for the state to provide. Police forces, national defence (army, navy, air force), and some minimum level of public healthcare all being essentials I think the state should provide. I am also something of a Keynsian in my economic outlook.

That obviously means my political standpoint will be fundamentally different to some others, but I do really like to try and understand alternate points of view, even if I don't agree with them.

In the UK the Universal healthcare IS funded by taxation, but we all pay it for it when we work, which most people do or try to do where possible. This seems ok to me, as I think it is a public good that government should provide using the taxes I pay to them.

A minimum level of healthcare means that more people are fit to work and can therefore contribute to society. It also seem very unjust that you should be denied to treatment for fatal conditions, for example cancer treatment, just because you are not rich enough to pay for it. If you're poor and sick it seems to me without universal public health care you are more likely to stay that way. This seems to me to make no sense if you want people contributing to the economy as much as possible.

I'm sure some people have some sound arguments against universal public healthcare, it's just I find them very hard to think of, what are they?

[I hope this isn't in any way thread high-jacking the question seems to fit here...]



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

28 Jun 2012, 11:29 am

ArrantPariah wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Yay! We can all pay more for health insurance! Those insurance executives weren't rich enough! Hopefully the SWAT team they send to my house for not being able to pay this 'tax' doesn't kill my dog before sending me to their rape cage.


Sorry, but you're way out of line, once again.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/janetnovack ... ike-a-tax/

Quote:
It does not apply to individuals who do not pay federal income taxes because their household income is less than the filing threshold in the Internal Revenue Code...

Roberts concludes the mandate functions more like a tax than the “penalty” for not buying insurance the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act labels it as, because in most cases “the amount due will be far less than the price of insurance,’’ and the IRS is “not allowed to use those means most suggestive of a punitive sanction, such as criminal prosecution,’’ to enforce it.

Moreover, he writes, “taxes that seek to influence conduct are nothing new”. For example, “federal and state taxes can compose more than half the retail price of cigarettes, not just to raise more money, but to encourage people to quit smoking.’’ He notes the court has also upheld “such obviously regulatory measures as taxes on selling marijuana and sawed-off shotguns.”


You've been listening to Repubnican propaganda without verifying, once again.

Romney's supporters all have health insurance, and absolutely nothing to worry about.

Those of you who are too poor to pay federal income taxes and also don't want health insurance similarly have absolutely nothing to worry about.

The Repubnican Party is simply trying to get you all riled up over nothing, and their ability to succeed at this will determine their chances to place Mitt Romney in the White House.


I don't know I am anything but a republican or a democrat for that matter........but I find the bill quite disturbing as well.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

28 Jun 2012, 11:32 am

YippySkippy wrote:
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. :roll:


That's what it looks like. You know they couldn't just strike down the mandate and let the rest of the bill stand because that would be armageddon for the insurance industry.

I strike down of the individual mandate alone would have been poetic justice regarding the insurance industry. Take that you bastards for lobbying Democrats to turn against the public option! There are states where public and private insurance providers coexist, Germany for instance. The insurance industry simply didn't want to have to risk competing with a government program so they bribed democrats to nix that idea and instead force everyone to buy their product. :roll:



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

28 Jun 2012, 11:32 am

TalksToCats wrote:
I've been wanting to ask about this for a while and this seems the right thread to do it.

Ok, as someone who lives in the UK, a country which has universal public healthcare, I really struggle to understand why so many people in the US don't seem to want it. The UK NHS has its' failings, and it certainly does have to ration healthcare to ensure it is shared out as fairly as possible, but I think it's a really good thing and can't understand why many in the US don't seem to want something like it.

First off, I need to explain that I am almost certainly liberal, a social democrat (but not a communist) and probably tending towards agreeing with quite a lot things most Green parties are for.

My political standpoint means that I think that some level of state intervention and regulation is a good thing, and that there are certain public goods that I think it is useful and right for the state to provide. Police forces, national defence (army, navy, air force), and some minimum level of public healthcare all being essentials I think the state should provide. I am also something of a Keynsian in my economic outlook.

That obviously means my political standpoint will be fundamentally different to some others, but I do really like to try and understand alternate points of view, even if I don't agree with them.

In the UK the Universal healthcare IS funded by taxation, but we all pay it for it when we work, which most people do or try to do where possible. This seems ok to me, as I think it is a public good that government should provide using the taxes I pay to them.

A minimum level of healthcare means that more people are fit to work and can therefore contribute to society. It also seem very unjust that you should be denied to treatment for fatal conditions, for example cancer treatment, just because you are not rich enough to pay for it. If you're poor and sick it seems to me without universal public health care you are more likely to stay that way. This seems to me to make no sense if you want people contributing to the economy as much as possible.

I'm sure some people have some sound arguments against universal public healthcare, it's just I find them very hard to think of, what are they?

[I hope this isn't in any way thread high-jacking the question seems to fit here...]


That all makes sense to me.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

28 Jun 2012, 11:35 am

YippySkippy wrote:
Quote:
Also come on you really think the Republicans are opposite of the Democrats and genuinely want to help americans.......come on both the major political parties are full of corruption and not trustworthy. I would think considering we switch from democrat to republican election after election only to find it really doesn't matter what side you vote for we still have the same Federal Government and its still the corrupt and very wealthy in charge.


The two-party system exists to divide the citizenry. While we are squabbling amongst ourselves, the corporations are quietly (though more and more brazenly as they consolidate their power) pulling all the strings.


Yes exactly, and people will still be too blind to see it even if we get one of these republicans promising to repeal the bill...they aren't going to. I mean they will all be shocked the president does not actually follow through and then they will blame it on the 'democratic' congress and thus keep people divided and ignorant to the bigger picture.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

28 Jun 2012, 11:45 am

TalksToCats - I'm American, and I don't understand why people don't want universal healthcare either. We have public education, and public police and fire departments. The government builds and maintains roads and infrastructure. The government controls post offices. All of that is fine, but for some reason universal healthcare would mean we're socialists or communists?? Don't try to understand us, we're stupid.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Arizona

28 Jun 2012, 11:49 am

ArrantPariah wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Yay! We can all pay more for health insurance! Those insurance executives weren't rich enough! Hopefully the SWAT team they send to my house for not being able to pay this 'tax' doesn't kill my dog before sending me to their rape cage.


Sorry, but you're way out of line, once again.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/janetnovack ... ike-a-tax/

Quote:
It does not apply to individuals who do not pay federal income taxes because their household income is less than the filing threshold in the Internal Revenue Code...

Roberts concludes the mandate functions more like a tax than the “penalty” for not buying insurance the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act labels it as, because in most cases “the amount due will be far less than the price of insurance,’’ and the IRS is “not allowed to use those means most suggestive of a punitive sanction, such as criminal prosecution,’’ to enforce it.

Moreover, he writes, “taxes that seek to influence conduct are nothing new”. For example, “federal and state taxes can compose more than half the retail price of cigarettes, not just to raise more money, but to encourage people to quit smoking.’’ He notes the court has also upheld “such obviously regulatory measures as taxes on selling marijuana and sawed-off shotguns.”


You've been listening to Repubnican propaganda without verifying, once again.

Romney's supporters all have health insurance, and absolutely nothing to worry about.

Those of you who are too poor to pay federal income taxes and also don't want health insurance similarly have absolutely nothing to worry about.

The Repubnican Party is simply trying to get you all riled up over nothing, and their ability to succeed at this will determine their chances to place Mitt Romney in the White House.


Do you know how much health insurance is? Do you know how low the filing threshold is for federal income taxes? For a lot of people health insurance alone costs more than the filing threshold and now the price of health insurance will go up and up and up. Basically if you're a homeless person, you don't have to buy health insurance. Thanks Obama.

They said on CNN that this "tax" will likely be treated as an extension of your income taxes so if you don't pay the "tax", you'll be not be paying your income tax. So they'll put you in prison for not paying your income taxes not for failing to buy health insurance. Some choice.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

28 Jun 2012, 11:50 am

YippySkippy wrote:
TalksToCats - I'm American, and I don't understand why people don't want universal healthcare either. We have public education, and public police and fire departments. The government builds and maintains roads and infrastructure. The government controls post offices. All of that is fine, but for some reason universal healthcare would mean we're socialists or communists?? Don't try to understand us, we're stupid.


Well Universal Healtcare is rather socialistic........but what is so wrong with socialism?


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.