Obamacare

[irishpat183]

It should be the concern of all of us. We are a better country than one that has no concern for the most vulnerable among us.

As in the citizens....Not the government.

 

[irishpat183]

Pat, please enlighten me on the Republican plan for health care reform. I've been waiting for so long, they hide it like Colonel Sanders secret recipe.

I didn't say Republicans have a plan...What?

I said that I"M FOR REFORM. Allow for pre-existing, prem caps...etc. Clean it up a bit.

But I guess I can't disagree with government without choosing "Democrat or Republican"...

 

[PraetorianND]

How was I being disrespectful?

"And education isn't free, either. Just check your taxes."

You serious?

 

[GoIrish41]

As in the citizens....Not the government.

A government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

 

[irishpat183]

A government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

If that were only the case......

Do you really believe that?

This is why I believe in smaller government. Our government is no longer "for the people"

 

[PraetorianND]

If that were only the case......

Do you really believe that?

This is why I believe in smaller government. Our government is no longer "for the people"

This is still a democracy and just because you are jaded does not mean that everyone is. I personally love America, love our government, and I love what we stand for. I'm a veteran, I served my country and I believe in what WE have created. I personally think health care should be a fundamental human right and will vote as such. If the majority agrees with me then so be it.

 

[GoIrish41]

If that were only the case......

Do you really believe that?

This is why I believe in smaller government. Our government is no longer "for the people"

Perhaps you believe that the millions who gained access to health insurance were not people? Obamacare was voted into law by the House and the Senate, and signed by the president. All of these "people" were voted in by the "people" and passed a law that was "for the people."

Yes. I most certainly believe that. It is the foundation of our system of government.

 

[Me2SouthBend]

I didn't say Republicans have a plan...What?

I said that I"M FOR REFORM. Allow for pre-existing, prem caps...etc. Clean it up a bit.

But I guess I can't disagree with government without choosing "Democrat or Republican"...

You've made it quite clear in a number of threads which way you vote (or at least would vote based on your leanings). I'm just pointing out that from 2000-2008 the government was lead by a Republican and no health care reform was proposed or passed into law. Now, if you were saying that you wanted health care reform during those years and I wasn't aware that you wanted it, then I stand corrected. I'm the first to say this law isn't perfect so let's hope that if nothing else it gets everyone pulling in the same direction for better reform. No reform for all these years is not the answer.

 

[PraetorianND]

How was that disrespectful? A little jab, but it was just pointing out that education, much like this health care bill, isn't "free" as is the misconception. And both are broken systems that need fixing...fixing that doesn't include throwing money at a dumpster fire or handing over the keys to our federal government.

I don't think anyone on the planet thinks that education (or healthcare) is free. I think you were being condescending and when I called you out you decided to backtrack because you realized it was unnecessary.

By the way - I am more than willing to pay more in taxes to ensure that everyone has healthcare. I'm not living in fantasy land. I know that stuff costs money.

 

[Woneone]

Pat, please enlighten me on the Republican plan for health care reform. I've been waiting for so long, they hide it like Colonel Sanders secret recipe.

Take Obamacare and rename it ObamaSucksCare.

Remove the Medicaid provision to provide it to families under $30,000.

Poof. Republican reform.

From what I've read, most republicans AGREE with nearly all of the major provisions.

This is just another example of how this two party system has gotten completely out of control. Instead of working out the fine details, loosening a bit of the regulation on Insurance companies, working out the medicaid details, ect, we get the two parties in a pissing contest, leaving America with decent idea, but a good amount of crap mixed in.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

...Its all about what your willing to pay for the greater good, im myself split between the middle, ofcourse rates have to go up to cover the sick, but hey, yall christians here, does it not apply in this situation?

I may be a Christian, but I don't support laws that force people to also be one. Christianity should remain voluntary.

 

[irishpat183]

You've made it quite clear in a number of threads which way you vote (or at least would vote based on your leanings). I'm just pointing out that from 2000-2008 the government was lead by a Republican and no health care reform was proposed or passed into law. Now, if you were saying that you wanted health care reform during those years and I wasn't aware that you wanted it, then I stand corrected. I'm the first to say this law isn't perfect so let's hope that if nothing else it gets everyone pulling in the same direction for better reform. No reform for all these years is not the answer.

There should have been reform back then as well. I agree with you.

Reform, not control....my good man.

 

[ab2cmiller]

Perhaps you believe that the millions who gained access to health insurance were not people? Obamacare was voted into law by the House and the Senate, and signed by the president. All of these "people" were voted in by the "people" and passed a law that was "for the people."

Yes. I most certainly believe that. It is the foundation of our system of government.

The only thing you left out, is that a majority of the "people" opposed it before it was passed by the "people" that they elected. Maybe the "people" that got elected should listen to the "people" instead of cramming back room deals with "made up" math down our throats over the objections of the American people. Oh by the way, the majority of people still oppose the law even after we passed the law so we could find out what was in the law.

 

[irishpat183]

Perhaps you believe that the millions who gained access to health insurance were not people? Obamacare was voted into law by the House and the Senate, and signed by the president. All of these "people" were voted in by the "people" and passed a law that was "for the people."

Yes. I most certainly believe that. It is the foundation of our system of government.

Obama care was rejected by 60% of the population. Nobody in congress even read the bill.

It was passed by a democratic congress.


There was no "by the people for the people" when it came to that bill.

 

[irishpat183]

The only thing you left out, is that a majority of the "people" opposed it before it was passed by the "people" that they elected. Maybe the "people" that got elected should listen to the "people" instead of cramming back room deals down our throats over the objections of the American people. Oh by the way, the majority of people still oppose the law even after we passed the law so we could find out what was in the law.

EXACTLY!


Funny how they forget that.....this was a wildly unpopular bill....

 

[GoIrish41]

There should have been reform back then as well. I agree with you.

Reform, not control....my good man.

But there wasn't, and Obama made a bold move to correct a longtime, horrific problem in this country. Now it is on the books, so lets talk about reforming and not repealing it, as the republicans have said consistently for the past three years.

 

[IrishLax]

Take Obamacare and rename it ObamaSucksCare.

Remove the Medicaid provision to provide it to families under $30,000.

Poof. Republican reform.

From what I've read, most republicans AGREE with nearly all of the major provisions.

This is just another example of how this two party system has gotten completely out of control. Instead of working out the fine details, loosening a bit of the regulation on Insurance companies, working out the medicaid details, ect, we get the two parties in a pissing contest, leaving America with decent idea, but a good amount of crap mixed in.

This is a good post. It's not the spirit/goal of the law that most people have a problem with... it's the execution.

The system has this effect on just about every law though, and it's not going to change. I don't really understand why we have to make a bunch of one-size-fits-all laws for a really large and non-homogeneous country like we have. There are some things, like defense, that it only makes sense for the federal Government to provide. So much other stuff could be handled by states... and if you didn't like the health care or business or drinking or gambling or whatever laws of one state... you could simply move to another. But that's really off topic.

 

[irishpat183]

But there wasn't, and Obama made a bold move to correct a longtime, horrific problem in this country. Now it is on the books, so lets talk about reforming and not repealing it, as the republicans have said consistently for the past three years.

Obama didn't correct the problem! He passed a bill that, in fact, is going to make it worse!


The problem was, it was rushed. That's exactly what he wanted..."it's on the books now, so screw it" reaction from the public.

 

[IrishLax]

But there wasn't, and Obama made a bold move to correct a longtime, horrific problem in this country. Now it is on the books, so lets talk about reforming and not repealing it, as the republicans have said consistently for the past three years.

Really? Horrific? That's a bit of hyperbole don't you think?

I bet you there are at most 5 people on this board who can even share a personal anecdote of how something bad (much less horrific) happened to them under the old system that will no longer happen under the new system. For the vast majority of people the old system was getting the job done... hence why change came slowly, because the affected portion was a minority.

 

[PraetorianND]

But are you also willing to tell someone that if the dont' want health care....they must pay a tax/penalty??

So you are willing to eliminate a person's right to choose?


That's where we differ, my friend.

Yes, I am willing to eliminate a person's right to choose. I'm ok with the government telling me I can't use Heroine, must wear a seat belt, and have healthcare. Why? Because I believe in utilitarianism.

 

[irishpat183]

But there wasn't, and Obama made a bold move to correct a longtime, horrific problem in this country. Now it is on the books, so lets talk about reforming and not repealing it, as the republicans have said consistently for the past three years.

Horrific problem? How so? Keep in mind, we not only cover over 80% of the population, we also have great care and top notch research. I think we have a pretty good system (yes, there needs to be some tweaks)


Have you seen health care in other nations?

 

[IrishLax]

Horrific problem? How so? Keep in mind, we not only cover over 80% of the population, we also have great care and top notch research. I think we have a pretty good system (yes, there needs to be some tweaks)


Have you seen health care in other nations?

He's going to cite the blanket average life expectancy statistic which shows other countries marginally higher as evidence of their health care being equal or better.

 

[GoIrish41]

Obama care was rejected by 60% of the population. Nobody in congress even read the bill.

It was passed by a democratic congress.


There was no "by the people for the people" when it came to that bill.

There are stacks of legislation that were passed by a majority in congress that the other side didn't want. If they are 60% of the population, why didn't they send representatives to DC that weren't going to vote for healthcare reform. This is the way the government works. That's why elections are so important.

 

[PraetorianND]

It cannot be. Someone has to provide the service.

Should Doctors work for free?

Food costs money and yet we fight hunger every chance we get. Just like we fight rape, murder, etc. Fighting all of that stuff costs money too. I think healthcare is THAT important for everyone.

 

[PraetorianND]

Ahhhh...the maximizer of overall "happiness"......

Too bad that doesn't apply to the principles our country was founded on...

I think that's exactly what our country was founded on, "the pursuit of happiness." I think there are a lot of unhappy people out there because they were diagnosed with cancer and now can't get healthcare. I know it makes you unhappy to pay more in taxes to pay for that but it makes me happy to see you unhappy so we offset there too. Sounds like a net gain to me.

 

[GoIrish41]

Horrific problem? How so? Keep in mind, we not only cover over 80% of the population, we also have great care and top notch research. I think we have a pretty good system (yes, there needs to be some tweaks)


Have you seen health care in other nations?

Millions of people did not have health insurance that now do. You might not think that is horrific, but I'd be willing to be that they do. What kind of "tweaks" are going to ensure that all those people don't have to suffer needlessly when they become sick or get injured. Absolutely it was a horrific problem.

 

[PraetorianND]

There is a big difference between the freedom to pursue happiness and the Government actively trying to maximize the utility of all of its citizens. That deserves pointing out.

Except we're voting as a collective (despite what you believe) for these governmental activities. And if the majority votes for something, it seems to me that that is what will make the majority happy. I.E. Utilitarian (greatest good for greatest number)

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Letting someone "pursue" happiness is much different than handing that 'happiness' to them by stealing it from another citizen.

 

[Ndaccountant]

There are stacks of legislation that were passed by a majority in congress that the other side didn't want. If they are 60% of the population, why didn't they send representatives to DC that weren't going to vote for healthcare reform. This is the way the government works. That's why elections are so important.

One thing I am both intellectually curious about and scared at the potential outcomes is how people will view this law once it changes the landscape of employment.

I am not talking about the potential for how many people are employed, but rather who employs them. We have already seen a shift in this country towards contract employment instead of direct employment. This will be / is being expedited with the new law. It gives employers another reason to limit direct hires due to the added costs. This will impact two classes of people, the young and the lower educated. This already happens in other nations around the world.

What I am fascinated to see is what people think of the law once they have insurance but have less secure employment. It goes back to utilitarianism and what is really best for the public good in the long run. It's an interesting thought and we will see what happens over time. But, as my company has already done, direct hires are going to be limited to top notch grads or mid-career hires with great resumes.

 

[irishpat183]

Letting someone "pursue" happiness is much different than handing that 'happiness' to them by stealing it from another citizen.

And how can one truly pursue happiness in a Utilitarisim society?