Supreme Court Ruling on Health Care

  • Thread starter Thread starter markomalley
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The only thing that will bring down Health Insurance premiums are less people buying premiums and choosing to pay out-of-pocket.

Health Insurance is a product like every other product. To think that HI premiums will go down by giving everyone HIC and having Health Insurance Exchanges, is akin to saying that

All internal-combustion engines in the US will use 89-Octane Gasoline and we will create use GasBuddy.com to help people find the lowest prices. 😛
 
seekerz said:
Correction, some people see more limitations on their choices and freedoms while other people gain choices and freedoms which they had no access to before…That is, in a nutshell, what this fight is about.
Click to expand...
Exactly! In the impossible effort to gain equality of result for all, many MUST lose some of their freedoms. I am glad you agree that freedoms are lost!

A truism: we cannot have equality of result without major loss of liberty! And that cost will also hit religious freedoms since all people must be provided an equal result under that ideology (the HHS mandate shows this will happen).
 
austenbosten said:
Well it was before the Federal government closed the loophole. Before the 1983 changes, three counties in Texas (Galveston, Brazoria, and Matagorda) opted out of the system and now use an Alternate Plan, a private pension plan created and administered by First Financial Benefits, Inc.

In 1983, the U.S. Congress closed a loophole in the original Social Security Act that allowed municipal governments to opt out of the Social Security system, and also brought all civilian federal employees whose employment began in 1984 or later under the system.

So no more munis can opt out of the bankrupt Ponzi scheme known as Social (in)Security
Click to expand...
Awesome for Galveston!
 
irishpatrick said:
Exactly! In the impossible effort to gain equality of result for all, many MUST lose some of their freedoms. I am glad you agree that freedoms are lost!

A truism: we cannot have equality of result without major loss of liberty!
Click to expand...
Agreed. The former Soviet Union is a perfect example of how well this system works.
 
scipio337 said:
In other words, the ends justify the means. If I rob from you to give to someone more deserving, it’s a win-win?
Click to expand...
Who’s robbing from anybody? Some people are getting insurance coverage who didn’t have it before and some people are scared they might lose their freedom to choose their doctor. What’s the comparison?

I had private insurance through a large employer and from one year to the next, I was forced to change my doctor because the employer changes insurance companies. Nobody asked me, I had no vote. I had to do what I was told: choose a new doc. These things are not new, but they become oh, so horrific when GOVERNMENT does it. Big deal.
 
seekerz said:
You obviously have never seen a Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement claim side by side with one for a large, private insurance company. Government can and does negotiate the lowest rates of all payers that I know of. Providers may set whatever prices they want, as high as they want, but Medicare/Medicaid pays what it determines is a reasonable rate and THAT is what they pay.
Click to expand...
Hence why many medicare partients find it harder and harder to find providers. We went through eight different providers in two years for my kid. Ended up using a hospital clinic and an ER visit for treatment.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
I disagree. Provisions such as the health insurance exchange will drive down premium costs as private insurance companies compete against public options for the vast number of new policy holders. I don’t think any business would choose to simply ignore a market consisting of 45 million potential new customers. And purchasing insurance DOES fix the major cause of increases in medical costs; namely that health care providers like hospitals will no longer have a reason to fleece the insured to recover the cost of treating the uninsured.
Click to expand...
No…they’ll just quit taking the insurance.
 
irishpatrick said:
Exactly! In the impossible effort to gain equality of result for all, many MUST lose some of their freedoms. I am glad you agree that freedoms are lost!

A truism: we cannot have equality of result without major loss of liberty! And that cost will also hit religious freedoms since all people must be provided an equal result under that ideology (the HHS mandate shows this will happen).
Click to expand...
Nobody is seeking equality of result for all - just equal access to basic services. Some people are stamping their feet because they MIGHT have to change doctors just so that other people who have no coverage can get it.

If you think the ACA means that all people will get equal health care services, then you need a dose of reality. No country yet has achieved that, to my knowledge, but I would love to be corrected.

BTW, since when did equality become a bad word? Methinks the Constitution would take issue with that…
 
Jeff Sessions: Simple GOP majority, strong president all we need to repeal Obamacare
On “The Matt Murphy Show” on 100 WAPI in Birmingham, Ala. on Friday, Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, the ranking Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, said that repealing Obamacare in the wake of yesterday’s Supreme Court decision will be easier now that it has been declared constitutional under Congress’ powers of taxation.
Click to expand...
Given that the decision has converted the law into a budget issue, Session said he now subscribes to the belief that the Senate will be able to repeal Obamacare with a simple 51 votes, instead of the 60 normally required to overcome a filibuster.
Click to expand...
“I believe a simple majority in the Senate with a strong president who leads and some of the abilities we have on budget reconciliation dealing with debt and taxes — I believe could be passed with a simple majority,” Sessions said. “I believe in effect, this legislation can be killed and we need to start over. We need to look at what we need to do to make health care more competitive and less expensive.”
Click to expand...
The junior Alabama senator emphasized the importance of the November election to change the direction of health care in the United States.
Click to expand...
“I think most people are really happy with the fabulous health care we have in America,” he continued. “It’s just expensive. And we’d like to create a mechanism — not a government-dominated mechanism, that can bring down the costs. That’s really possible. I’m telling you, it can be done. I believe there’s a reasonable chance and there will be a referendum in November on what direction we go.”
Click to expand...
Sessions went on to say it was important for presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney to come out right away with an alternative, and noted that the GOP only needs to pick up three seats to stop to the legislation.
Click to expand...
dailycaller.com/2012/06/29/jeff-sessions-simple-gop-majority-strong-president-all-it-will-take-to-kill-obamacare/#ixzz1zCoE4oJG
 
Dawnia said:
No…they’ll just quit taking the insurance.
Click to expand...
Why do you think that? Much fewer people will go to the ER with common conditions treatable by a much cheaper family physician now that they will have insurance.
SamH said:
Agreed. The former Soviet Union is a perfect example of how well this system works.
Click to expand...
Actually modern Europe is a perfect example of how well this system works. Far fewer deaths due to amendable conditions and higher life expectancy than the United States.
 
austenbosten said:
The only thing that will bring down Health Insurance premiums are less people buying premiums and choosing to pay out-of-pocket.

Health Insurance is a product like every other product. To think that HI premiums will go down by giving everyone HIC and having Health Insurance Exchanges, is akin to saying that

All internal-combustion engines in the US will use 89-Octane Gasoline and we will create use GasBuddy.com to help people find the lowest prices. 😛
Click to expand...
The health care market is unlike any other market. Choosing to pay-out-of-pocket? Are we having a serious discussion or crafting fairy tales?
 
seekerz said:
Nobody is seeking equality of result for all - just equal access to basic services. Some people are stamping their feet because they MIGHT have to change doctors just so that other people who have no coverage can get it.

BTW, since when did equality become a bad word? Methinks the Constitution would take issue with that…
Click to expand...
We are all equal under the law (or should be), yet that does not mean we can ever have a free society in which all people have an equality of result–which is what the left wants. It goes further than changing doctors (though no one should be able to tell us we must do that either). It is about personal choice, and maybe even the choice to NOT carry any coverage, or the choice to not pay the fed taxes for the ACA.

What you cannot see is that with each new program, we have less personal choice. There are many people who would love to have their Social Security taxes each month to invest on their own, but they cannot do that, which limits their choices. With each new tax, average citizens become less free, and what really gets me is that ACA will simple make the rich richer.
 
***QUESTION: It is now a TAX. But it did not go through the proper channels to become a tax. The healt care thing started in the Senate and went to the House. A proper tax starts in a committee, goes to the House and then to the Senate.

Why can’t the whole thing be kicked out because as a “tax” it did not follow proper procedure?

Why do we have procedures if they are not going to be followed?
 
seekerz said:
And when the majority of people have insurance, where will that take them but over the bankruptcy cliff?
Click to expand...
The amount of money that ACA will actually require will help push the USA over the bankruptcy cliff…we cannot even properly fund Social Security.

I have heard that not only will taxes go up to cover the ACA in 2014 when it really kicks in, but the left is pushing to get the so-called Bush tax cuts expired–that would mean the middle class would take back-to-back major tax increases, and do not fool yourself into thinking that won’t happen. When you have trillions of new spending to do, it has to come from somewhere.

We desperately need to reduce spending–yet we are going the other way, and none of us could do that in our own personal budgets.
 
seekerz said:
Correction, some people see more limitations on their choices and freedoms while other people gain choices and freedoms which they had no access to before…That is, in a nutshell, what this fight is about.
Click to expand...
Yep! 👍
 
stevegravy said:
Hence why many medicare partients find it harder and harder to find providers. We went through eight different providers in two years for my kid. Ended up using a hospital clinic and an ER visit for treatment.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry you had to go through that. Imagine if we all had access to insurance companies which reimbursed at similar rates (different of course, but close enough). Who would the providers drop us for?
 
aicirt said:
***QUESTION: It is now a TAX. But it did not go through the proper channels to become a tax. The healt care thing started in the Senate and went to the House. A proper tax starts in a committee, goes to the House and then to the Senate.

Why can’t the whole thing be kicked out because as a “tax” it did not follow proper procedure?

Why do we have procedures if they are not going to be followed? ***

The bill was referred to and passed by the Committee on Ways And Means which is the proper procedure.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top