What if Obamacare is voted down by the Supreme Court?

Superfreak said:
One of the largest drivers of health care costs is increasing obesity rates in this country. Why would they not mandate gym memberships or healthy foods? Is that not also for the greater benefit of society and would it not also lower the costs to the country for health care?

I am a strong proponent for promoting healthy eating and exercise, but in no way should it ever be mandated by the government.
Click to expand...

this is a key example of how liberals think with their hearts and not their brains. Conservatives can see the bullshit right around the corner. Liberals at this time will say "pfff.... that will never happen" and then in 5 years they will be saying "you know... that's not such a bad idea . . "
 
Derp Derp said:
They do in a manner of speaking. There are regulations in place about the use of products like trans fats and high fructose corn syrup in our foods. There are also restrictions to other consumer goods that are potentially dangerous to ones health. Tobacco and alcohol for example.
Click to expand...

there is a key difference between restrictions on something and forcing one to proactively buy something.
 
Cynic said:
if you WANT to drive.

Maybe you can commute by train and don't need to.

This is equivalent to forcing you to buy car insurance, even if you don't own a car or plan on driving.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't, because there comes a point in time where you will use healthcare, or should for preventive measures. Those who use the system and then renege on payment increase the cost for those of us who pay our way. Hospitals, doctors increase charges because of deadbeats who don't pay. It affects the quality of care for all. I see healthcare for all will reduce costs which is for the greater good of all.
 
Rana said:
No, it isn't, because there comes a point in time where you will use healthcare, or should for preventive measures. Those who use the system and then renege on payment increase the cost for those of us who pay our way. Hospitals, doctors increase charges because of deadbeats who don't pay. It affects the quality of care for all. I see healthcare for all will reduce costs which is for the greater good of all.
Click to expand...
Screw the "All" it's in the greater good for me!
 
Rune said:
You are right. However, a single payer system would have reduced costs by 30% in administative fees alone, but your side made sure it was "not on the table".
Click to expand...


Are you sure, mandates would mean everyone would have insurance and doctors and hospitals would not have to write off bad debt which would mean they do not have to pass the debt on to those who pay which translates into lower costs.
 
Cynic said:
there is a key difference between restrictions on something and forcing one to proactively buy something.
Click to expand...
Name me just one other nation with a universal health insurance mandate that has rampantly gone around requiring it's citizens to purchase a wide range of goods and services at the governments dictates? Name one. I'll even make it easier for you. Name one nation with a universal health care mandate that requires it's citizens to purchase any goods and services other than health and auto insurance? Name just one!

Also, answer me this. Tell me how many modern industrialized nations that have implemented a universal mandate have rescinded or discarded it and gone back to a market driven systems? Name just one.
 
Rana said:
No, it isn't, because there comes a point in time where you will use healthcare, or should for preventive measures.
Click to expand...

True. But shouldn't i be the one to decide how to pay for it? If I want catastrophic care coverage while paying for the yearly out of pocket of preventative medicine... should I not be allowed to do so?

Those who use the system and then renege on payment increase the cost for those of us who pay our way. Hospitals, doctors increase charges because of deadbeats who don't pay.
Click to expand...

translation: 'I hate poor people'

It affects the quality of care for all. I see healthcare for all will reduce costs which is for the greater good of all.
Click to expand...

So adding 30 million people to the system (increasing demand) will lower costs? Only if we start seeing the government begin dictating what will and won't be covered and for whom.
 
Rana said:
Is there? It involves what is good for the society as a whole.
Click to expand...

What is good for society as a whole is for us to end the obesity in this country. Should the government mandate the number of government approved exercise classes we take each week? Should they ban all McDonalds, Coca Cola, Pepsi, Fried foods, candy, cookies etc... that only harm an individuals health?
 
Rune said:
Why not try to enhance your credibility instead of pathologicaly lying about what you think liberals believe? The only beliefs you know are true are your own.
I am quite over being told what I "really" believe by you, and will not be letting this issue go anytime soon. Prepare to be brought about every time I notice these lies.
Click to expand...
citing citizens united as one of the worst supreme court cases of all time is sheer idiocy. that is just a plain fact.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
citing citizens united as one of the worst supreme court cases of all time is sheer idiocy. that is just a plain fact.
Click to expand...

How can you possibly defend CU? If for no other reason at all, it allows untold, uncounted foreign money to play a deciding role is US government?
What good can you say for it?
 
Rune said:
Funny thing is , it doesn't fuck with their money. If you are poor enough, you don't have to pay the fine. If you are not so poor, you already have insurance.
If not poor but still don't have insurance, you are stupidly dangerous to yourself and others.
Click to expand...
stop being a moron and start realizing the real world around you, not some alternate reality. why not just admit you simply have no clue about this issue?
 
Derp Derp said:
Like auto insurance?
Click to expand...

for the record I am against being forced to buy auto insurance as well.
I think you should buy auto insurance to protect yourself from being sued. If you crash into someone and don't have insurance, they can sue you for your assets.

and this argument has already been used. you aren't forced to buy auto insurance if you don't drive. you WILL be forced to buy health insurance even if you are a early 20's healthy male. not even the same thing.
 
Rune said:
How can you possibly defend CU? If for no other reason at all, it allows untold, uncounted foreign money to play a deciding role is US government?
What good can you say for it?
Click to expand...
I dont' say any good for it. the difference between you saying it is one of the worst and myself saying it isn't that important is I'm intelligent enough to overlook any bullshit campaigning that candidates do based on the corporate money they receive. why aren't you capable of it?
 
Cynic said:
for the record I am against being forced to buy auto insurance as well.
I think you should buy auto insurance to protect yourself from being sued. If you crash into someone and don't have insurance, they can sue you for your assets.

and this argument has already been used. you aren't forced to buy auto insurance if you don't drive. you WILL be forced to buy health insurance even if you are a early 20's healthy male. not even the same thing.
Click to expand...

Bad argument, think it through.
 
Cynic said:
this is a key example of how liberals think with their hearts and not their brains. Conservatives can see the bullshit right around the corner. Liberals at this time will say "pfff.... that will never happen" and then in 5 years they will be saying "you know... that's not such a bad idea . . "
Click to expand...

Exactly, there are a lot of things we could proclaim are for 'the greater good'. It essentially means the government gets to decide exactly how we live our lives.
 
Rune said:
Bad argument, think it through.
Click to expand...

if you actually look at the stats for hospital costs of a healthy male in their 20's, it's staggeringly non-existent. For all intents and purposes, there are significant areas of our society that don't use healthcare. Why the FUCK should I be forced to subsidize the great unwashed masses?

and we already have medicare for old people so don't use the whole "you'll be old one day so you should still pay in now"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top