On June 28 2012 18:50 Ironsights wrote: I truly hope the courts strike down atleast the individual mandate.
As an American, I am terrified of the idea that the government can not only order me to purchase a product, they can do so in such a facist manner. Hey, insurance companies, you are GOING to do this, but in return we will FORCE every american to buy your product...
No. Just no.
It is a fact that our health care system, especially in regards to the costs, needs improved. It is also a fact that there are far better ways to improve it that don't involve selling the very Soul of America.
Every single time you pay taxes you're being "ordered" to purchase a product not to mention car insurance...
Yes, but it's not the same thing in action. If they just taxed us, it's legal. No question. But they're scared to do it because of how medicaid/medicare currently work out.
It just sets a bad precedent, because if they find this legal, the next time they use this method it may not be on a product as useful to everyone.
edit: also, car insurance is voluntary. you don't have to buy it if you don't want to; you just can't drive a car on public roads if you don't. There is no similar option in the ACA.
ok work time: glhf to all the fellow TL political junkies
On June 28 2012 21:43 BluePanther wrote: It just sets a bad precedent, because if they find this legal, the next time they use this method it may not be on a product as useful to everyone.
Interestingly, the ideas for Social Security privatization seemed to amount to an individual mandate to put money into a private 401(k) account. I wonder if the justices (assuming they strike down the health insurance mandate) would try to write their opinions in a way that still make the former allowable.
On June 28 2012 21:25 DoubleReed wrote: I'm hoping they just get rid of the mandate. It's unnecessary and frankly it sounds blatantly corrupt to me.
Sadly, I would so surprised if they only took out the mandate ;_;
All the provisions of the law have very high support like 60-80%, except the individual mandate. But what people fail to realize is that none of the other provisions like requiring insurers to not deny coverage is possible without the mandate or a socialized healthcare system supported by taxes, like in every other advanced country in the world.
If it's possible, why hasn't any other country done it yet?
Good video that was posted, except the part where they said the mandate isn't needed.
The problem isn't universal healthcare, it's that because the people don't want to pay taxes, they have to be legally compelled to buy proper health insurance.
I understand that people keep claiming that the mandate is necessary but I haven't been convinced of that fact. Are you really suggesting that health insurance companies can't make money without completely ripping off their customers with bullshit tactics like pre-existing conditions? If that's the case then it should not be privatized at all.
Although I wouldn't have an issue with the mandate IF we had a public option. As it stands it seems like further corruption of our healthcare industry. More marriage between private companies and government, uniting to fuck over the common good to make money.
It just sets a bad precedent, because if they find this legal, the next time they use this method it may not be on a product as useful to everyone.
Every other advanced country in the world has universal healthcare. So how bad is the precedent really?
But when you have an extremely bad/ rare case, which doctors do you consult? I'll give you a hint, its usually not a doctor that works under socialized medicine...
It just sets a bad precedent, because if they find this legal, the next time they use this method it may not be on a product as useful to everyone.
Every other advanced country in the world has universal healthcare. So how bad is the precedent really?
But when you have an extremely bad/ rare case, which doctors do you consult? I'll give you a hint, its usually not a doctor that works under socialized medicine...
Over here its usually a doctor working at a university medical center, which are funded heavily by various governments. There's hardly ever any money in solving serious cases, much easier to sell viagra to old white men.
It just sets a bad precedent, because if they find this legal, the next time they use this method it may not be on a product as useful to everyone.
Every other advanced country in the world has universal healthcare. So how bad is the precedent really?
As has been explained ad nauseum throughout the thread, this isn't just about healthcare. In fact, this case isn't really about healthcare at all.
I'm disagreeing with his argument which IS about healthcare, and in particular the precedent that it sets. If you don't want to argue about this point, then stop talking.
It just sets a bad precedent, because if they find this legal, the next time they use this method it may not be on a product as useful to everyone.
Every other advanced country in the world has universal healthcare. So how bad is the precedent really?
But when you have an extremely bad/ rare case, which doctors do you consult? I'll give you a hint, its usually not a doctor that works under socialized medicine...
What has this got to do with the precedent set by upholding Obamacare?
In other countries with universal coverage, you consult with whatever doctor you want to.
It just sets a bad precedent, because if they find this legal, the next time they use this method it may not be on a product as useful to everyone.
Every other advanced country in the world has universal healthcare. So how bad is the precedent really?
As has been explained ad nauseum throughout the thread, this isn't just about healthcare. In fact, this case isn't really about healthcare at all.
I'm disagreeing with his argument which IS about healthcare, and in particular the precedent that it sets. If you don't want to argue about this point, then stop talking.
No, his argument is not about healthcare. Go re-read it again: "It just sets a bad precedent, because if they find this legal, the next time they use this method it may not be on a product as useful to everyone."
EPT
