IF Obamacare worked, would you support it?

ok, your position is that covering everyone is not worth the level of political rancour in the country. Correct?

 

You should learn to read. That's what it costs NOW. Under the ACA you will get a subsidy depending upon how much above the poverty line you are. People below the poverty line get healthcare FREE. As far as the mind control, I can sell you a genuine demagnetized tin foil hat to keep out those pesky guvment mind control rays. Cash. In small unmarked bills.

 

well you see that's a false dichotomy, because it's not like I'm the only person losing the freedom to choose. A supporter of Obamacare, even though they support it, is losing their freedom to choose. What you're really asking is: is the freedom of the people more important than health coverage?

Sadly, it would seem you're more of a statist than the cloaked figure in your avatar.

 

You are wrong about the 'rationing' here. If you have a policy the insurance company has to adhere to the contract. Under Obamacare, they can do as they please unimpeded and unchallenged. It is solely up to the govt with no oversight.

You can buy coverage now. Obamacare compels everyone to have HC insurance. That means if you have no insurance you must buy it. And you cannot have any kind of insurance. You have to have insurance that meets the Obamacare minimums. And how will you buy it of you cannot afford it? Govt subsides that will apply to people making up to $80,000 a year. Those subsides come from taxes.And if you do not have it you will be fined. And if you own a business with 50 or more people you must cover them, or be fined $2,000 per employee. And what will those businesses do? Pay the fine because it will be about 20% of the cost of a policy. So how is the Affordable Health Care Act affordable? How does it 'work'?

 

My "stuff" is politely...which is taking extreme self control, mind you.... explaining why IT WON'T WORK.....
at least not as those who've been duped into believing "working" means something besides transferring more money, authority and control over our lives to state collectivist central planners.

 

Yes indeed, everyone is indeed losing their freedom to choose to not be covered, or to only be covered a little.

Is that particular freedom more important than health coverage?

Yes Im a statist. I love and worship the state etc etc. Most people are. Its not the purpose of this discussion though.

 

No.

My position is that health care coverage for the uninsured should be provided by cutting the defense budget and letting everyone with preexisting good health coverage remain in place without govt. interference.

Let me give you an analogy. Obama has attempted to put out a small fire in a forest by clear cutting all of the trees. He will put the fire out that way, but at the cost of destroying the forest.

 

Well the US has its own type of rationing, related to ability to pay. Those can and do pay the most get the best coverage. Five star hotel type hospitals, the most expensive latest researched drugs. Other people get very little, thats systemic rationing.

Its called affordable because it makes policies affordable for everyone, going to answer the thread premise?

 

-

There have been 8 pages of posts, conveniently ignoring the blatant anti-white Racism inherent in the Obama-care legislation now... WHY!?

Are you all to cowardly to take on the issue of the institutionalized racial discrimination placed in the legislation and the fact that a HEALTH CARE bill is being used to take over all funding of higher education in the United States, with the control being handed off to a non-elected committee whose stated goal is to deny education to White Americans?

What is wrong with you?

-

 

Ah so you do want to see everyone covered but not yet without adding even more burden on the taxpayer?

If the defence budget had been cut already, drastically reduced would you then support it?

 

Wrong again. Private insurance here does not ration no matter how many times you say otherwise. You get a policy with stated contractual coverage. Deal with it.

Policies are not more affordable under Obamacare. I showed you how and why. It demand that people buy something that they feel that they personally do not need. If someone has no insurance and is now required to spend money on insurance, it is not affordable if they personally feel that they do not want to buy it and cannot afford it. When you get past that, we can move forward from there.

 

Sorry, we werent ignoring you. Its just that no one beleives your outlandish claim and cant be bothered to argue it.

I for one think your claim is ludicrous and that you are foolish to talk of race wars and such.

 

Let me take this one step further. Healthcare should be a matter for state and local govt., not the federal govt.

The defense budget has been cut, but not sufficiently. I want the federal govt. to be weak so it cannot impose its will upon me.

I accept the need to care for people. I don't accept the role of the federal govt.

I see the US Govt. much like I saw Stalin's Soviet Union.

 

No indeed private insurance contracts do not rationing, but the overall system of private insurance does.

I would like to move forward and discuss being forced to buy insurance but you seem to refuse to answer the basic premise of the thread first. IF it was affordable and gave reasonable coverage,would you support it?

 

Racial Preferences in Obama Care, Article #001

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/racial_preferences_in_obamacare.html

 

It does not cost $20,000 per family for healthcare. And if you believe an entity that's telling you that then....well that makes it convenient for them.

 

So youll accept a state legilated affordable care act.

Indeed, so your happy with universal coverage when its state legislated and the defence budget is drastically reduced.

 

Racial Preferences in Obama Care, Article #002
http://michellemalkin.com/2010/03/23/racial-preferences-in-obamacare/

 

LOL. Oh dear grants require some representation of minorities!!!


My the disgrace! Ill get my pitchfork, let the bells ring for the new race war.

 

Wrong! You still hold onto the silly notion that private insurance rations. One more time. You see a policy, agree to the terms then sign it. Rationing has zero to do with it.

Huh? The original question was would I support it if it 'worked'. Not whether or not it is affordable which it is not.

You want to make HC insurance more affordable? The only way to do it is to cap the cost of HC. You have yet to address that as the only solution nor have you offered an alternate way to affordability.

 

All other things being equal...I would accept the decision of people at the local and state level, but not at the federal level.

[video=youtube;L8lwg-NMWjE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8lwg-NMWjE[/video]

 

So you are for racially preferential treatment. Sounds like discrimination.

 

No your referring to the individual contracts rather than the system as a whole.

No read the OP, worked is in terms of reasonable cost and effective coverage. If it meets those, whether or not you think it can.....would you support it?

 

Racial Preferences in Obama Care, Article #003


http://pjmedia.com/blog/hicks-hidden-deep-within-obamacare-racial-preferences/

 

Yeah I hate white guys.

Yeah youre a discriminated against majority are you?