# Supreme Court upholds Affordable Health Care Act (Obamacare)



## smile72 (Jun 28, 2012)

> Chief Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion, which held that the law was a valid exercise of Congress's right to tax.


Sourrce:MSNBC
http://nbcpolitics.m...h-care-law?lite
This made me jump for joy I'm so happy, I'm glad this law is constitutional.
Yuki Amano - Did I fix it?


----------



## air2004 (Jun 28, 2012)

smile72 said:


> > The majority opinion was written by Chief Justice John Roberts, who held that the law was a valid exercise of Congress’s power to tax.
> 
> 
> Sourrce:MSNBC
> ...


I suppose you will also be happy when some president down the line says , "your grand kids must pay for internet access or pay a fine " or they must pay for a car , or pay for rubbers or ect.


----------



## smile72 (Jun 28, 2012)

air2004 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > > The majority opinion was written by Chief Justice John Roberts, who held that the law was a valid exercise of Congress’s power to tax.
> ...


I'm smart enough to realize (unlike you) that everyone needs healthcare, you don't need a car. You don't need to have sex. You don't need internet. It's the broccoli argument. It makes no sense and you just sound foolish making it.


----------



## Deleted User (Jun 28, 2012)

This is great news! Yay!

Also, you should read this.


----------



## air2004 (Jun 28, 2012)

smile72 said:


> air2004 said:
> 
> 
> > smile72 said:
> ...


Healthy people dont need health care


----------



## purplesludge (Jun 28, 2012)

air2004 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > air2004 said:
> ...


Then why do insurance companies accept healthy people and decline people with preexisting conditions?


----------



## emigre (Jun 28, 2012)

air2004 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > air2004 said:
> ...



They sorta do if they have an accident.


----------



## Deleted User (Jun 28, 2012)

air2004 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > air2004 said:
> ...



You obviously don't know how health care works. Basically, you give money so that when you DO get sick, it won't cost as much as $50,000,000.


----------



## smile72 (Jun 28, 2012)

air2004 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > air2004 said:
> ...


That is the dumbest statement ever. Why do people who drive need car insurance then? They might not get in an accident, they need if something happens, everyone will go to the hospital or to a doctor in their lifetime.


----------



## The Catboy (Jun 28, 2012)

I am glad to hear this!


----------



## air2004 (Jun 28, 2012)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-05TLiiLU

Is this the sort of leadership you really want ? . (I'm not a conservative either )


----------



## triassic911 (Jun 28, 2012)

air2004 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > air2004 said:
> ...


This is how I imagine you for saying that:








Seriously.


----------



## air2004 (Jun 28, 2012)

Yuki Amano said:


> air2004 said:
> 
> 
> > smile72 said:
> ...


You trying to tell me that people with health insurance never went broke paying for their health care ?


----------



## smile72 (Jun 28, 2012)

air2004 said:


> http://www.youtube.c...h?v=hV-05TLiiLU
> 
> Is this the sort of leadership you really want ? . (I'm not a conservative either )


----------



## Deleted User (Jun 28, 2012)

air2004 said:


> Yuki Amano said:
> 
> 
> > air2004 said:
> ...



I know they get broke, but that's because they have a lazy fatass job. Either that, or the health care is bad.


----------



## air2004 (Jun 28, 2012)

smile72 said:


> air2004 said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.youtube.c...h?v=hV-05TLiiLU
> ...


----------



## Hanafuda (Jun 28, 2012)

purplesludge said:


> air2004 said:
> 
> 
> > Healthy people dont need health care
> ...



Because insurance is just that ... an agreement to insure against the cost of a FUTURE need. A person with a preexisting condition has an immediate need, and they should have gotten their insurance before their health problem arose. When you go to an insurance company with a preexisting condition and expect them to cover your medical expenses for only the cost of usual insurance premiums, you're effectively saying you should only have to pay a small fraction of the actual cost of your medical care and someone else should pay all the rest. That's why, in the longterm, this socialized medicine scheme, along with the cost of all the other entitlement programs that take from the productive parts of society and give to the leeches in exchange for votes, will result in the US defaulting on its debt.


----------



## SSVAV (Jun 28, 2012)

air2004 said:


> http://www.youtube.c...h?v=hV-05TLiiLU
> 
> Is this the sort of leadership you really want ? . (I'm not a conservative either )


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Jun 28, 2012)

I know how these topics can spin out of control, so I'll only say this once.

*If I see any flaming, name calling, or general assholishness, this topic will be locked and the offenders warned, and depending on the severity, suspended as well. *


----------



## smile72 (Jun 28, 2012)

SSVAV said:


> air2004 said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.youtube.c...h?v=hV-05TLiiLU
> ...


----------



## SSVAV (Jun 28, 2012)

smile72 said:


> It is if you live in Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, and many other red states. If you are like me an had cancer before you could afford health care that screws you over in these states as no one will cover you and if they will, it will be for a price you can't pay.


I'm not the best suited person to talk about this either. Here in France health care is a right and not a privilege, everyone gets affordable health care for non-vital diseases (optics, dentists or other) and free care for things that are vital, in your case cancer.

My mother has thyroid cancer and the treatment she has isn't very cheap so to say. She has to wait for months when she needs a specific injection, but she gets it free. Her daily medication is also free.

The US don't shine in the social department, but it is slowly getting there, and this is the first step. I suppose this law has some kind of exceptions or aids for people like you that have no choice. If does, right?


----------



## BlueStar (Jun 28, 2012)

air2004 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > air2004 said:
> ...



And you're going to be healthy forever I guess, the first immortal man.


----------



## smile72 (Jun 28, 2012)

SSVAV said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > It is if you live in Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, and many other red states. If you are like me an had cancer before you could afford health care that screws you over in these states as no one will cover you and if they will, it will be for a price you can't pay.
> ...


I'm not sure what you mean, here the wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obamacare
Maybe that will answer your questions.


----------



## Anon10W1z (Jun 28, 2012)

Haha! This is great news!


----------



## SSVAV (Jun 28, 2012)

smile72 said:


> I'm not sure what you mean, here the wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obamacare
> Maybe that will answer your questions.



I mean if people like you who need to pay extremely expensive health care will get some help from the government or if you are excluded from the law.

EDIT: Read it, it says you don't pay the tax penalty if health care costs more than 8% of household income. It sucks. US should help people who have these kind of diseases, really.

EDIT2: Read it again, says that "increases insurance coverage of pre-existing conditions" patients. Not sure to what extent but it's a start. I've also read something about a pre-existing condition exclusion regulation, not sure how it works.


----------



## smile72 (Jun 28, 2012)

SSVAV said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not sure what you mean, here the wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obamacare
> ...


Yes, it helps people with pre-existing conditions. And at the time I was on medicaid so I'm fine, well I will get kicked off at the end of the month.


----------



## Sheimi (Jun 28, 2012)

It is nice to see pre-existing conditions gone, but I may not switch to this til I get more information on it.


----------



## dickfour (Jun 28, 2012)

People are going to be forced to buy health insurance. That's not a bad thing. We have free heath care now. This is just going to force people to pay for all their free goodies. Socialism comes at a price and it's about time the free lunch is over.


----------



## Thanatos Telos (Jun 28, 2012)

Canada still has the best, same with France.
And yes, I am an American.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Jun 28, 2012)

air2004 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > air2004 said:
> ...



I'm sorry but what? Okay, first of all, the States are in bad need of a good health care system no matter what. It doesn't really take a genius or someone to even visit the states that the people there, aren't all that healthy. Especially if the States is one of the top countries in the world that's obese and severely overweight. That's just one thing. There are tons of people who are severely sick and everything there, and this is a way to help them. If anything, this is a step in the right direction for the U.S. to finally catch up with other parts of the world to actually move on into a better age.


----------



## dickfour (Jun 28, 2012)

Thanatos Telos said:


> Canada still has the best, same with France.
> And yes, I am an American.


Then why do people with money come running to the states when the need a heart operation or cancer treatment?


----------



## chartube12 (Jun 28, 2012)

No more insurance caps FTW! Now only If we could say the same for bandwidth caps.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Jun 28, 2012)

dickfour said:


> Thanatos Telos said:
> 
> 
> > Canada still has the best, same with France.
> ...



Probably because all the top surgeons are from the states? Not to mention, a lot of doctors up here have multiple jobs and work in the States.


----------



## LightyKD (Jun 28, 2012)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2tivWi5IQo&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Nuff said!


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 28, 2012)

Anon10W1z said:


> Haha! This is great news!




You don't mind being heavily penalized for insurance a majority of Americans don't give a s**t about?  How I pity you people.  There are those who say, "But insurance is required when you get a car, so why shouldn't healthcare be required?"  I'll tell you why, yes, you should get insurance for a car because it's the law, but guess what? * It's not mandatory to own a car. * Then again, those douchebag wankers in Congress are reelected, there will be a government-issued mandate requiring every American 18 and over to own a car with insurance and those who don't pay will be thrown in jail.


----------



## smile72 (Jun 28, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> Anon10W1z said:
> 
> 
> > Haha! This is great news!
> ...


It's not a penalty it's a tax. And the max per family would be $2085 and that is by 2016. It's not that Americans don't like it (they like the stuff in it), it's just that the majority of Americans believe the garbage Republicans tell them, such as death panels.


----------



## GreatZimkogway (Jun 28, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> Anon10W1z said:
> 
> 
> > Haha! This is great news!
> ...



Uh...you sure your first statement has any merit at all?  The most don't care about?  Someone get this guy a newspaper. 

PS: Yeah, it's nearly mandatory to own a car.  Pretty fucking hard to get a job otherwise.  Trust me.  I would know.  It's one of the main reasons I keep getting turned down for jobs.


----------



## smile72 (Jun 28, 2012)

alunral said:


> the_randomizer said:
> 
> 
> > Anon10W1z said:
> ...


The U.S. public transportation system is garbage, this speaking from a person in Cook County, where there are plenty of trains. A car is pretty much mandatory.


----------



## blahkamehameha (Jun 28, 2012)

President Obama: "Let's be clear, this isn't a tax. I repeat, not a tax. (does wink and teeth sparkle) You can rest assured again, this is not a tax."

Supreme Court: "This is a tax."

I gladly welcome new President Romney.


----------



## smile72 (Jun 28, 2012)

blahkamehameha said:


> President Obama: "Let's be clear, this isn't a tax. I repeat, not a tax. (does wink and teeth sparkle) You can rest assured again, this is not a tax."
> 
> Supreme Court: "This is a tax."
> 
> I gladly welcome new President Romney.


Then you don't comprehend the need for health care in America. As thanks to Fox News, we hate socialism (cough *Medicare* cough *Social Security*) so we'll never have free healthcare like Canada.


----------



## blahkamehameha (Jun 28, 2012)

So, Obama flat out being caught lying makes me an unintelligent buffoon.

Nice argument, albeit weak.


----------



## Densetsu (Jun 28, 2012)

The health care system is still fundamentally broken.  With the amount that we spend on health care, there's no way our system can sustain itself.  Obamacare is only a patch slapped over a bigger problem.

We also need to fix the mentality of Americans.  We're greedy-ass bastards.  People think they're entitled to a full-body MRI just because their toe hurts.


----------



## smile72 (Jun 28, 2012)

blahkamehameha said:


> So, Obama flat out being caught lying makes me an unintelligent buffoon.
> 
> Nice argument, albeit weak.


I'll give you one lie to Romney's hundreds.


----------



## The Catboy (Jun 28, 2012)

blahkamehameha said:


> President Obama: "Let's be clear, this isn't a tax. I repeat, not a tax. (does wink and teeth sparkle) You can rest assured again, this is not a tax."
> 
> Supreme Court: "This is a tax."
> 
> I gladly welcome new President Romney.


So you will take one lie for the millions Romney's lies?
Romney lies about his lies.


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 28, 2012)

The Catboy said:


> blahkamehameha said:
> 
> 
> > President Obama: "Let's be clear, this isn't a tax. I repeat, not a tax. (does wink and teeth sparkle) You can rest assured again, this is not a tax."
> ...



Right, because we all know Obama never lied during his four years as "President"

Yes, because we all know that Socialism is _*SO*_ much better than Capitalism.  Canada has roughly ten percent of the US population; less people = less money the government spends.  The US has ten times the population and with the economy being as bad as it is, do the people in power *really* think socialized medicine will work that much better?  And before you verbally emasculate me, no, I don't watch Fox News or any news channel because in general, news is so bloody negative and heavily focused on how both sides of the political spectrum have morons I couldn't care less hearing about.   We're 16 trillion dollars in debt and when the government pays for everyone's insurance, it'll all go to hell.  Yes, I agree that everyone should be insured, BUT, we should be able to choose who our provider is so we can get QUALITY insurance, not the kind that makes people wait for a long time to be treated.


----------



## gamefan5 (Jun 28, 2012)

air2004 said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > air2004 said:
> ...


Yeah? Too bad life doesn't work that way. I'm pretty sure you need health care to *STAY *healthy in life. XD
Anyway this is GREAT NEWS. XD


----------



## freaksloan (Jun 28, 2012)

Whose fault is it now, when heath care cost still continue to sky-rocket? There is nothing affordable about Obamacare.


----------



## The Catboy (Jun 28, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> Right, because we all know Obama never lied during his four years as "President"


I am just going to leave this here and get back on topic.

I have always been a big supported for this plan, so I am quite glad to see it wasn't shoot down.


----------



## gamefan5 (Jun 28, 2012)

freaksloan said:


> Whose fault is it now, when heath care cost still continue to sky-rocket? There is nothing affordable about Obamacare.


Well, that's why the US needs to keep the health costs low.
Oh wow, sometimes I'm lucky to live in Canada. Then again one of it's major problems are the wait times. I never knew how much of a problem people think Obamacare is a problem. .
Well I ask this.
Is Obamacare a problem?


----------



## Skelletonike (Jun 28, 2012)

Health care is really important. =3
*Is happy that he gets free health care in all European Union country members*


----------



## Thesolcity (Jun 28, 2012)

There was this comment on Reddit that explained everything "Obamacare"


----------



## gamefan5 (Jun 28, 2012)

Skelletonike said:


> Health care is really important. =3
> *Is happy that he gets free health care in all European Union country members*


----------



## Skelletonike (Jun 29, 2012)

gamefan5 said:


> Skelletonike said:
> 
> 
> > Health care is really important. =3
> > *Is happy that he gets free health care in all European Union country members*


----------



## chartube12 (Jun 29, 2012)

People also fought against Bill Clinton's health plan for children. I tell all those who were against it to *uck off. My older bother has Autism and other health problems. If it wasn't for the health plans approved in the mid-90s my brother would of died a few times. So I can tell you health care is important as natural resources. Anyone who says other wises is worse then scum.

Edit: wait times in city and large towns of the US are very long. ER is even worse. Smaller town family doctors can get you in faster but only after waiting 1-2 weeks for an appointment. Speaking of witch the smaller town doctors are not as experienced as the middle and large size ones. And often lack newer technogy which can make a difference between life and death. with new tech comes some major down sides. Not even talking about the cost here, but the ridiculous phone system all doctors seem to be using. Back in the old days you had nurses who knew some medical stuff who could give u advice in a pitch. Now you have to go threw all these voice system crap and then talk to un-medicinally trained office secretary. Yes the general health care of america needs a major revamp. This plan of obama's is a start.


----------



## gamefan5 (Jun 29, 2012)

Skelletonike said:


> gamefan5 said:
> 
> 
> > Skelletonike said:
> ...


----------



## smile72 (Jun 29, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> The Catboy said:
> 
> 
> > blahkamehameha said:
> ...


Okay it seems you do not understand, Obamacare is not socialism, it's very much capitalist as you get taxed if you don't _*buy *_health insurance from health insurance companies, You don't know what socialism is do you? Most of the world including the U.S. has socialism, no first world country is completely capitalist.


----------



## Densetsu (Jun 29, 2012)

gamefan5 said:


> freaksloan said:
> 
> 
> > Whose fault is it now, when heath care cost still continue to sky-rocket? There is nothing affordable about Obamacare.
> ...


A major factor in the amount of money spent on healthcare in the US is the salary of physicians.  As of 2010, there were over 660,000 physicians and surgeons in the US.  Most US physicians (non-surgeons) make an average of $175,000 per year, with surgeons making upwards of $400,000 a year and orthopedic surgeons averaging $500,672 a year.  If we assume conservative numbers and just say that every physician (including surgeons) makes $175,000 a year, that's $115 billion dollars being paid out to physicians every year.  That doesn't even include overhead costs of running a hospital, ordering tests (X-rays, MRIs, CT scans, blood workups, lipid panels, etc.) and overall inefficiency in the way hospitals are run.

Most physicians aren't willing to take a pay cut, so there are lobby groups that protect the physicians' interests by blocking any proposition to Congress to lower health care costs.  It's not because physicians are selfish; it's because the way the US medical education system is set up, people have to work so damned hard just to become a physician.  After studying one's ass off and sleeping only 3-5 hours a day for 14 years, many would feel entitled to a high salary.  And once you reach that point where you can call yourself a doctor, the job itself isn't exactly cushy.  It's still a high-stress job with long hours (sometimes 100 hours a week if you're on call).

Meanwhile, you have board members of pharmaceutical companies making a killing off new patents of drugs.  The drugs they produce are extremely expensive and those costs contribute to the cost of health care.  Those costs are again shouldered by those who need health care.  Big Pharm execs don't actually care if their drugs work or not; they only care that they have a statistically significant effect (no matter how small), so that they can continue to line the pockets of their shareholders.

The US makes it so difficult to become a doctor, and once you become one, they work you like a horse.  That, combined with the specialized knowledge that they have, is why doctors get paid so much.  Most doctors wouldn't be willing to take a pay cut just to make health care cheaper for everyone.  Whenever someone attempts to pass a bill for universal health care, lobby groups (consisting of physicians, hospital board members and Big Pharm board members) pay off members of Congress so that they don't sign the bill.  These bribes come in the form of "donations" to their campaigns.

This problem is extremely difficult to fix, because med schools can't just "make it easier" to become a doctor so that they can be paid less.  Physicians are held to a high standard of clinical knowledge, and there's no way around this.  After all, we can't be putting our lives in the hands of a bunch of incompetent idiots.  And Big Pharm is so powerful, they have influence in political circles.  In order to lower the cost of health care, _someone_ has to take a pay cut.

As a future physician, I'll be one of the first to admit that some doctors get paid way do damn much.  I'm sure orthopedic surgeons can cope with having to wait a little longer to save up for their third Lamborghini.

*EDIT*
One important point I forgot to mention is that medical school is really expensive in the US, and most medical students are on loan.  Since the federal government did away with subsidized loans last year, the loans that med students take out begin to accrue interest immediately.  Med students don't make any money for the first 4 years of their education, so that's 4 year's worth of built interest that they can't do anything about until they start making money.  There are very few full-ride scholarships for med school (because the assumption is that you'll make enough money to pay it all back).  And what physician _*wouldn't*_ want to pay off their loans as fast as possible?  As a second-year med student myself, I'm already $200,000 in debt. By the time a student finishes his/her education, he/she has to pay back $300,000-$400,000 in debt.  This is yet another reason why doctors aren't willing to take a pay cut.



the_randomizer said:


> Yes, because we all know that Socialism is _*SO*_ much better than Capitalism.


The prevailing theory among my classmates in med school is that socialized medicine in the US would actually work.  Of course, a socialized system has its drawbacks; no system would be perfect, but it would still be better than the clusterfuck of a system we have in place now.  Can you imagine--the only thing the US spends more money on is warfare!  No other country even comes close to spending as much as we do on health care.  People talk about how socialized healthcare would be so bad for the US, but we already have so many socialized institutions in place (public education system, firefighters, police force, etc.).  I don't see anyone complaining about how our K-12 education is socialized.

I could get into it more, but after writing that wall of text above, I don't have the time nor the energy to write another wall of text.  Maybe I'll come back to discuss it, maybe I won't.

Anyway, _*everybody*_ gets sick, sooner or later.  That's why everyone should have health insurance.  People can't just wait until they get sick, and *then* decide to get insurance.


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 29, 2012)

smile72 said:


> Okay it seems you do not understand, Obamacare is not socialism, it's very much capitalist as you get taxed if you don't _*buy *_health insurance from health insurance from health insurance comoanies, You don't know what socialism is do you? Most of the world including the U.S. has socialism, no first world country is completely capitalist.



Why should I be taxed for a healthcare program I don't want?  I should be able to *CHOOSE WHAT I WANT*, not want those wankers in Congress say I *have* to get.


----------



## Densetsu (Jun 29, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> Why should I be taxed for a healthcare program I don't want?  I should be able to *CHOOSE WHAT I WANT*, not want those wankers in Congress say I *have* to get.


_*This*_ I can agree with.  Health insurance companies should have a competitive market so that people can use the policy that suits them the best.  That would give insurance companies an incentive to offer better, cheaper packages in order to draw more customers.

Some states have only one company handling all health insurance policies in that state.  They have a monopoly and can set whatever prices they want.


----------



## Thesolcity (Jun 29, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> not want those wankers in Congress say I *have* to get.



The "compulsory insurance" bit is a trade off since insurance agencies will no longer be able to deny you based on any "pre-existing conditions". (Cancer, disease, birth defects.). Its there so wankers don't buy healthcare at the last minute when they absolutely need it. "_Well shit, I have cancer and its gonna run me up some. Better get some fucking insurance now_!". Its written to be fair to _both_ parties. Besides, I don't see anyone up in arms about mandatory auto insurance.


----------



## Frank Cadena (Jun 29, 2012)

Talking about cost controls, I read recently that a small organisation is using statistics to drive down the cost of healthcare somewhere in America. The article suggests that if this were to be widely used, it can cut healthcare by at least 40% and as high as 50% by eliminating waste. Read the article here


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 29, 2012)

Thesolcity said:


> I don't see anyone up in arms about mandatory auto insurance.




Cars aren't mandatory, that's why people aren't upset about it.


----------



## BlueStar (Jun 29, 2012)

Don't know why anyone would need a factcheck to work this one out, but here's one anyway. 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jun/28/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-obamacare-adds-trillions-deficit/


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 29, 2012)

BlueStar said:


> Don't know why anyone would need a factcheck to work this one out, but here's one anyway.
> 
> http://www.politifac...llions-deficit/



I don't care if you hate Romney (which many people seem to do lately; I guess it's the hip thing to do) or whatever, but it seems like you're saying that this "wonderful" insurance plan won't add more to the national debt. Because it will, regardless of what party you stand by.


----------



## BlueStar (Jun 29, 2012)

Would you care to explain how a policy that involves cutting spending and raising taxes will ADD to the debt?  Romey keeps saying it, but he's never been able to explain how, so maybe you could help him?

The funny thing is, Romney pretty much invented 'Obamacare' and is now having to fight against it by pulling lies like the one above out of his ass.  Although totally changing your side of the argument in an attempt to get elected isn't much new for Mitt, is it?


----------



## Clydefrosch (Jun 29, 2012)

Your god said to love thy neighbor, so go and throw some money in the medicare pot so when he gets sick, he doesnt have to die.
And then realize that, if you ever end up in a similar position, your neighbors will have done the same and you will not die either.

I really dont understand why there is so much opposition against this kind of thing. Or against raising taxes either. America, do you really not understand that tax-money, ultimately, is money the government can spend on the country, the infrastructure, education, culture, is money thats spend on each and everyone of you?
You want them to fix problems, but that requires money. You are in a pretty bad situation right now, as is most of the world, because governments did not take enough money from you. Instead, they took money from other countries. For interest. Millions and billions of interest, rising by the second.
I see why it is much nicer not to pay much for your government, while still getting all the benefits a government has to offer, but this can only lead to problems in the future. Granted, not the future of either the population, or the politicians who thought that all this would be a good idea when this started. But problems non the less.


To be honest, instead of insurance companies, there should be a simple health-tax. Companies taking care of such vital needs as health ruin everything cause sooner or later, they all realize how much money they can save if they just ignore the people that have less money (the number of which is ever rising) Or the ones with the more expensive kind of sickness (Basically, with rising numbers of "poor" people, this number too, rises). Allowing them to exclude risky patients is a, i think the american term would be, slippery slope. Eventually, they will consider excluding your future children cause your genes allow them to predict that your kids will probably get diabetis or cancer. Or they will try to make it so that some diseases or medical problems will allow for exclusion later on.
Un-insurancables, maybe kidney failure. It'd be much cheaper if those people just died after a week instead of wasting precious space and expensive dialysis equipment (a single session adds up to a few hundred dollars just for the one time only parts of the filtration system) while waiting for a transplant.
They were allowed to do so much crap already, do you really think that there will be an end? The end will be when everyone pays but no one gets any insurance anyway. The past has shown us that these kinda things only get worse. Even if, year after year, these companies would triple their profits, they would never consider helping to heal a few more patients next year.  They couldn't, cause if they dont triple their profits again, it would look bad for stockholders.

Everyone throws in a little and everyone in need will get some out of it. Unless the whole country suddenly turns sick, or the medical companies think that now would be the perfect time to raise their prices to even more perverted levels, this system could work. Even if there were a small number of people abusing the system it would still work. The system stops working though, when companies start to abuse the system for their own gain. Or when large parts of the population weasle their way out of doing their part. (Like tax fraud. You dont even want to know what all the seemingly small tax fraud attempts eventually add up to for a government...)
Yes, it would suck for the few people who realize on their deathbed, in hindsight, that they were never sick and didnt need any insurance ever. But that will be a small minority. And if these cases ever became the majority, now then would be a perfect moment to pass new laws.

And it would lead to a healthier country, on several levels. Sick people would get help sooner, they wouldnt just go to the doctor when a normal cold eventually turned into a life endangering lung-infection. It would reduce stress on all of you, since you know, you will be taken care of. None of you will be healthy forever, quite the contrary, most of you will have more health problems than did your parents, or their parents. and it will just get worse for your kids.


Now on a different note, for those of you who can vote over there, dont vote for Mitt. If anything, what he will do is, he will speed up the car one last time before it smashes into the stone wall. The car here being the economy. And the wall being the inevitable crisis and crash thats going to hit you anyway. There is no way around it, all you can decide between right now is, if you want to hit at full speed and make sure you die, or if you risk coming out of it alive, but probably with two broken legs and a punctured lung.

Alright, got a bit longer than i though it would now, glad for the news anyway


----------



## smile72 (Jun 29, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> BlueStar said:
> 
> 
> > Don't know why anyone would need a factcheck to work this one out, but here's one anyway.
> ...


People tend to hate liars. They also tend to hate liars who lie about lying.


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 29, 2012)

I'm sure that's not the only reason, but I bet anything that our current POTUS never lied during his leadership, either, _*right??*_


----------



## smile72 (Jun 29, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> I'm sure that's not the only reason, but I bet anything that our current POTUS never lied during his leadership, either, _*right??*_


Not nearly as much as Romney. Romney is an exception to any politician.


----------



## The Catboy (Jun 29, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> I'm sure that's not the only reason, but I bet anything that our current POTUS never lied during his leadership, either, _*right??*_


I could name a few reasons to hate Mitt. I actually lived in Massachusetts when he was governor.
Also Obama has some lies, every politician lies here and there. But Mitt always lies, he has been caught lying about his own lie.


----------



## pubert09 (Jun 29, 2012)

Thesolcity said:


> There was this comment on Reddit that explained everything "Obamacare" <-- (Not even what its officially titled btw) did. I'm reserving this post until I find it and paste that giant wall of text into a quoted spoiler. Brb.
> 
> Well that was quick.
> 
> ...


After reading that explanation, I don't understand why anyone makes a big deal about this. Why are people so selfish and greedy to not want to have that mandatory health care rule if it makes it easier for others to afford if they make less money and/or have pre-existing conditions? There are all these good changes that can drop the cost of health care, but as soon as there is one thing that will be at the expense of certain people, they are like "NONONONONONONONONONONO!" How about a little compassion to your fellow man, huh? All I ever hear people want to do is take and never give anything.
I honestly think the end justifies the means.


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 29, 2012)

smile72 said:


> the_randomizer said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure that's not the only reason, but I bet anything that our current POTUS never lied during his leadership, either, _*right??*_
> ...



Now if I could only pinpoint the very reason why I hate discussing politics in the first place.....Oh, I know!  It's because both sides are always bitching about something trivial and never coming to a compromise! That's why!


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Jun 29, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> Thesolcity said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see anyone up in arms about mandatory auto insurance.
> ...



Legally, no they are not, but try getting a job without one and see how far you get. They'll laugh you out the door if you tell them your main mode of transportation is city transit/carpool/skateboard/walking.


----------



## Fear Zoa (Jun 29, 2012)

TwinRetro said:


> the_randomizer said:
> 
> 
> > Thesolcity said:
> ...


Not always, in some cities (new york comes to mind) having a car is pointless and using public transport is perfectly acceptable.


----------



## triassic911 (Jun 29, 2012)

Fear Zoa said:


> TwinRetro said:
> 
> 
> > the_randomizer said:
> ...


Agreed, I found it odd that having a car is necessary in some jobs, but since I live in NYC, I guess I was naturally going to be unaware.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Jun 30, 2012)

Fear Zoa said:


> TwinRetro said:
> 
> 
> > the_randomizer said:
> ...



New York may be an exception to the rule. I can't say for sure. What I can say is I have had jobs in 24 of the 50 US states, and in all of them my boss required me to have a "reliable method of transportation" and in all instances that meant my own vehicle.


----------



## stanleyopar2000 (Jun 30, 2012)

time to kill off the _"useless eaters"_


----------



## smile72 (Jun 30, 2012)

the_randomizer said:


> smile72 said:
> 
> 
> > the_randomizer said:
> ...


One side refuses to compromise you mean and their voters love it.


----------



## The Catboy (Jun 30, 2012)

TwinRetro said:


> the_randomizer said:
> 
> 
> > Thesolcity said:
> ...


This a fact!
I have been searching for a job for months and even though I live in the area of the job and I am in walking distance, they still want me to have a car.

Also the public transportation system in America is pure crap. If you don't live in a major city, then you are SOL when it comes down to public transportation system. My area was going to set up a new system that was going to be cheaper and even go outside the city to pick up people in the other small towns around it, but it was voted down because people complain that it would be too expensive. No one wanted to pay the extra dollar for it.


----------



## deishido (Jun 30, 2012)

I find it funny that so many people who were upset by Obamacare being passed that they made statements about moving to Canada. [Twitter, Facebook, other outlets]

Obamacare is almost identical to Canada's Healthcare system. Funny enough, you never hear about how sick anyone in Canada gets, something must be working there.


----------



## pubert09 (Jun 30, 2012)

The Catboy said:


> TwinRetro said:
> 
> 
> > the_randomizer said:
> ...


Same problem with this healthcare bill. It's a good thing for everyone, but people don't want to spend a little bit more to fund it.
I would gladly pay more in taxes for public transportation around where I live and I will gladly follow that "mandate" in order to make it easier for others less fortunate.


----------



## Dann Woolf (Jun 30, 2012)

deishido said:


> I find it funny that so many people who were upset by Obamacare being passed that they made statements about moving to Canada. [Twitter, Facebook, other outlets]
> 
> Obamacare is almost identical to Canada's Healthcare system. Funny enough, you never hear about how sick anyone in Canada gets, something must be working there.



It's because it's _Obama_care. The man can't so much as take a shit without everybody whining about how he's "ruined America".


----------



## RchUncleSkeleton (Jun 30, 2012)

The Catboy said:


> TwinRetro said:
> 
> 
> > the_randomizer said:
> ...


A job can't legally require you to have a car unless the actual job entails you driving your own vehicle. As long as you have a reliable way to get there everyday, whether it be by bus, train, walking or bike, they can't deny you a job for simply not owning a car. I understand that many people who run these businesses may be A-holes and tell you that but it's simply not true and they can get in trouble for saying such things.

It would be like a job requiring you to own a boat because it's located near a beach.


----------



## The Catboy (Jun 30, 2012)

RchUncleSkeleton said:


> The Catboy said:
> 
> 
> > TwinRetro said:
> ...


It's not that they tell me I can't get a job without a car, it's that they won't hire me because I don't have a car.
I look less interesting because I don't drive.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Jun 30, 2012)

RchUncleSkeleton said:


> The Catboy said:
> 
> 
> > TwinRetro said:
> ...



Employers can make any stipulations they want, and they often do. It's not illegal in any sense of the word. It's like a job requiring you to have your own tools, or own a suit and tie, or any number of things.


----------



## DarkStriker (Jun 30, 2012)

I see that USA finally got this. Norway has this thing. I actually paid 0 NOK(Norwegian currency) for my surgical operation on removing my cecum. You pay absolutely nothing if it requires a operation or anything to make you healthy again. We pay a tax of 50% if our payment for a year is over 50.000 NOK. Heavy shit. Though our taxes goes for thing like healthcare for the elders. Free school until university. Free dentist until 18 years old(Where you get a 50% off when u are 18) and all kind of things. It might be harsh when you first see it, but really who doesnt want to enjoy your old life without having to worry about any kind of money when your country gives you a monthly income for how much you have worked on your life(Yes we get a bigger income once we retire from working depending on how much your income was and for how long you worked) and yes those money covers more than a month even if you work was only washing toilets.


----------



## wrettcaughn (Jun 30, 2012)

dickfour said:


> Thanatos Telos said:
> 
> 
> > Canada still has the best, same with France.
> ...



People come running to the states to be operated on by foreign doctors.  The doctors are here because the money is here...


----------



## Glyptofane (Jun 30, 2012)

This Act isn't about helping anyone.  It's about trying to squeeze as much money as possible out of a sinking ship.  The money will probably end up being used for more wars instead of health care.  Just see how the taxes that were supposed to uphold our national infrastructure such as roads and bridges ended up being used.  If anything, our healthcare system will end up being run like a giant VA clinic.


----------



## Densetsu (Jun 30, 2012)

Old8oy said:


> dickfour said:
> 
> 
> > Thanatos Telos said:
> ...


People come from foreign countries to be operated on in the US because we have some of the best _*emergency*_ care in the world; however, we're ranked 38th in the world when it comes to _*preventive*_ care.  

It's a lot easier (and a lot cheaper) to prevent health problems than it is to treat them once they've started.  US healthcare is geared more towards the latter, and therein lies the problem.  All other countries are great at making sure their patients never reach the point of needing emergency care.

*EDIT*
There's also zero political drive in the US to improve the state of preventive health care.  The anti-government side of me wants to say it's because those in power stand to lose a lot of money if the demand for emergency care is reduced or eliminated altogether.


----------



## deishido (Jul 1, 2012)

Dann Woolf said:


> deishido said:
> 
> 
> > I find it funny that so many people who were upset by Obamacare being passed that they made statements about moving to Canada. [Twitter, Facebook, other outlets]
> ...


Yeah, poor guy can't get a break. Maybe if people weren't so up his ass about everything they could see everything he's actually done >.>


----------



## dickfour (Jul 1, 2012)

deishido said:


> Dann Woolf said:
> 
> 
> > deishido said:
> ...


The guy has been a total failure over 8% unemployment for almost 4 years gas prices up over 100% health costs up over 30% food prices up 50% he spent 5 trillion bucks with nothing to show and in his free time he's running guns to drug gangs. He's gotten a lot done it's all sucked though. He should be fired for poor performance.


----------



## deishido (Jul 1, 2012)

dickfour said:


> deishido said:
> 
> 
> > Dann Woolf said:
> ...


He brought the economy crisis back down, where I live gas prices have dropped recently and he actually doesn't control what the gas companies make their prices. The unemployment rate has gone down since he came into office and he wasn't directly involved in the drug cartel situations. it's not like he himself physically handed them to them. He's also brought back many people from the pointless wars overseas, effectively ending that as well and is cleaning up that situation now. Not to mention that we now have an effective healthcare system set up. Yes he's spent money, but you have to spend money to make money.


----------



## pubert09 (Jul 1, 2012)

dickfour said:


> deishido said:
> 
> 
> > Dann Woolf said:
> ...


You are being biased and/or looking at it in a very negative manner. There has been a lot of improvement and you can't expect our economy to suddenly be fixed with any president.
It takes time, especially when you have problems he can't control, like gas prices.
Besides, I honestly think the other presidential candidate wouldn't really have done any better. It was a hard time and still kind of is.


----------



## smile72 (Jul 1, 2012)

dickfour said:


> deishido said:
> 
> 
> > Dann Woolf said:
> ...


Oh wow guess you watch way too much Fox "News" the Mexican gangs got the gun due to Arizona's shitty gun laws, but Fox never tells you that. Health costs raise regardless, it's because our health care system sucks. Gas raises regardless of what he does, how many times do I have to say this, Presidents don't control gas prices. Unemployment peaked at 10%, he brought it down to 8.2%. Despite having a useless Congress for 2 years. So please learn the facts or don't post such misleading and false statements.


----------



## wrettcaughn (Jul 1, 2012)

Valiant effort gentlemen, but it's no use debating dickfour.  I'm pretty sure he's actually Glenn Beck.


----------



## smile72 (Jul 1, 2012)

Old8oy said:


> Valiant effort gentlemen, but it's no use debating dickfour.  I'm pretty sure he's actually Glenn Beck.


Probably, I've told him the truth many times but, he just wants to believe these lies.


----------



## Lacius (Jul 1, 2012)

dickfour said:


> he spent 5 trillion bucks with nothing to show


Actually, Obama didn't spend 5 trillion dollars:



Spoiler











Please note that Obama's contribution without the economic recovery policies is around 0.3 billion dollars.


----------



## DigitalDeviant (Jul 1, 2012)

TwinRetro said:


> I know how these topics can spin out of control, so I'll only say this once.
> 
> *If I see any flaming, name calling, or general assholishness, this topic will be locked and the offenders warned, and depending on the severity, suspended as well. *



Thanks TwinRetro, lets be civil please? Personally I find it interesting that Justice Roberts was the deciding vote in this, a Justice put in place by the previous republican administration. Its also interesting that he supported it by applying congress' right to tax yet it didn't hold up under the commerce clause meaning you can't force someone to get healthcare but you can tax them. Obama sold this not as a tax though so the GOP will relentlessly attack him and release multiple attack ads about this tax.


----------



## Frank Cadena (Jul 2, 2012)

A tax that is only applicable if you do not have healthcare. I see it as a fine but is called a tax because congress can't levy fines. Also, IRS will find you if you don't pay.


----------



## BlueStar (Jul 3, 2012)

Thing is, there's already a form of socialism going on in the emergency room.  People don't get stuff treated because they're not covered, it becomes acute, they show up in ER, if they have no insurance and no money to pay either the government has to cough up or the hospital has to swallow the cost and pass it on to people who have paid and who do have insurance in the form of increased fees.

At least with a government funded system people are able to show up when they first start getting symptoms, it can be treated cheaply, rather than at great cost down the line, rather than other people having to pay more to cover it.  In socialised systems there's an actual incentive to keep people well, rather than an incentive for people to need expensive, long procedures due to advanced illness.


----------



## blahkamehameha (Jul 3, 2012)

Heard rumors that John Roberts is wiser than people are giving him credit for. The theory is his decision was to basically lock the election for Romney, All Romney has to do is re-run all the instances of Princess Pelosi, Obama, etc. saying that this isn't a tax over and over in his ads.

and lol at 19 year old liberals repeating what their college professors say in this thread. please, i gladly welcome you to list romney's "million lies" . If he has millions, Obama has trillions. (no pun to the increased deficit during his term.)


----------



## Lacius (Jul 3, 2012)

blahkamehameha said:


> Heard rumors that John Roberts is wiser than people are giving him credit for. The theory is his decision was to basically lock the election for Romney, All Romney has to do is re-run all the instances of Princess Pelosi, Obama, etc. saying that this isn't a tax over and over in his ads.


So you're saying the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States knowingly said something was constitutional, even though he thought it wasn't, so the conservatives would gain politically? Pretending this were moral and that there were any evidence for this, there is no telling how the ruling will effect the 2012 election, especially since Obama's numbers and support for the Affordable Care Act have gone up since the ruling.



blahkamehameha said:


> and lol at 19 year old liberals repeating what their college professors say in this thread.


Just because you want something to be true doesn't make it true.



blahkamehameha said:


> please, i gladly welcome you to list romney's "million lies" .


http://video.msnbc.m...730618#47730618
http://thinkprogress...-economy-worse/
http://www.politicus...itt-romney.html



blahkamehameha said:


> If he has millions, Obama has trillions. (no pun to the increased deficit during his term.)


Obama has not increased the deficit by trillions, as some might claim. Obama is the only candidate to offer a viable bipartisan deficit-reduction plan. And Romney's plan would increase the deficit substantially. Romney's plan decreases revenue more than it decreases spending.

http://nymag.com/dai...fairy-tale.html



Spoiler


----------



## BlueStar (Jul 3, 2012)

blahkamehameha said:


> Heard rumors that John Roberts is wiser than people are giving him credit for. The theory is his decision was to basically lock the election for Romney, All Romney has to do is re-run all the instances of Princess Pelosi, Obama, etc. saying that this isn't a tax over and over in his ads.
> 
> and lol at 19 year old liberals repeating what their college professors say in this thread. please, i gladly welcome you to list romney's "million lies" . If he has millions, Obama has trillions. (no pun to the increased deficit during his term.)



Lol at all the early 20s softcocks repeating what their parents shout at the tv.


----------



## Frank Cadena (Jul 4, 2012)

Now that Romney is the republican nominee, he can now push the reset button and move to the centre-right instead of right-right that he campaigned on for the nomination, where he's always been if you look at his record as governor of Massachusetts. He has a chance to win this if no one mentions Mormonism, because really even though people say that his religion doesn't matter it actually does matter a lot, and no one mentions Bain.

Mormonism because the evangelicals and other conservative Christians see Mormonism as a cult and don't get me started on Atheists and Mormonism. Bain because when you look at what Bain Capital does, none of looks good even though it's all legal. Perception is key. I'd like to see how Romney does during the debate and how he would tackle those issues if it ever comes up.


----------



## wrettcaughn (Jul 4, 2012)

BlueStar said:


> Thing is, there's already a form of socialism going on in the emergency room.  People don't get stuff treated because they're not covered, it becomes acute, they show up in ER, if they have no insurance and no money to pay either the government has to cough up or the hospital has to swallow the cost and pass it on to people who have paid and who do have insurance in the form of increased fees.
> 
> At least with a government funded system people are able to show up when they first start getting symptoms, it can be treated cheaply, rather than at great cost down the line, rather than other people having to pay more to cover it.  In socialised systems there's an actual incentive to keep people well, rather than an incentive for people to need expensive, long procedures due to advanced illness.



Our public school system is also a form of "socialism".


----------



## smile72 (Jul 4, 2012)

blahkamehameha said:


> Heard rumors that John Roberts is wiser than people are giving him credit for. The theory is his decision was to basically lock the election for Romney, All Romney has to do is re-run all the instances of Princess Pelosi, Obama, etc. saying that this isn't a tax over and over in his ads.
> 
> and lol at 19 year old liberals repeating what their college professors say in this thread. please, i gladly welcome you to list romney's "million lies" . If he has millions, Obama has trillions. (no pun to the increased deficit during his term.)


Yeah,sure Obama lies more than Romney, keep watching Fox News with your tin foil hat on. And why don't you just Google Mitt Romney lies, you will come up with enough evidence.And it saves us the trouble of having to try and educate you.


----------

