Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Click Here to Login

Reply
Old 01-21-2011, 07:48 AM  
Senior Member

Greenville, SC
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,141 | Kudos: +188
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedJeepXJ View Post
freedom offered by god? we are a secular country
Oh brother..... Just in the interest of staying on topic, I will just say "Okay".


Quote:
Originally Posted by RedJeepXJ View Post
so the people sick enough to be eligible for medicare need medicare? amazing
So you think that the person who pays some out of pocket for healthcare services (when service is rendered) and the person who pays nothing at all will likely use the SAME amount of healthcare? Let's just say, they both get a cough and a sore throat. Which do you think is more likely to make a trip to the doctor?
__________________

Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2011, 08:01 AM  
Senior Member

Bristol, Tennessee
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062 | Kudos: +48
Quote:
Originally Posted by YelloJeep View Post
So you think that the person who pays some out of pocket for healthcare services (when service is rendered) and the person who pays nothing at all will likely use the SAME amount of healthcare? Let's just say, they both get a cough and a sore throat. Which do you think is more likely to make a trip to the doctor?
for healthcare, yes.

regardless of what plan II have had whether it covers a little or a lot or whether the copay's were small or I had to pay all of it because of a high deductible If I am sick enough I feel I need to go to the doctor I do, If I think I can get through it without too much suffering, then no

right now emergency care is free anyway, well free to the users, us insured people have to pay...... And moving on from all that this bill requires everyone to pay in, to choose a plan so I am not sure where you are even going with your argument
__________________

Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2011, 08:46 AM  
Senior Member

Greenville, SC
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,141 | Kudos: +188
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedJeepXJ View Post
for healthcare, yes. regardless of what plan II have had whether it covers a little or a lot or whether the copay's were small or I had to pay all of it because of a high deductible If I am sick enough I feel I need to go to the doctor I do, If I think I can get through it without too much suffering, then no
I just will have to agree to disagree on that. Moving on...

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedJeepXJ View Post
... And moving on from all that this bill requires everyone to pay in, to choose a plan so I am not sure where you are even going with your argument
I must have missed the whole thing about EVERYONE (regardless of income) paying in. If it is in fact everyone pays the same for the same service then I guess I'll have to be on board with that one.
I am still a little apprehensive about the government requiring it's citizens to purchase any type of service whether public or private. Sounds unconstitutional to me.

Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2011, 04:23 PM  
Senior Member
 
Brian's Avatar

Rochester, New York
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 262 | Kudos: +47
RedJeep, my friend, you had me laughing out loud.

Your idea of rights and mine aren't quite in alignment. We have a right to work, but not a right to a job. We have a right to earn a wage, but not a right to be given things we didn't pay for. We have a right to purchase health insurance or not as we see fit, but we don't have a right to demand others pay for it for us. (Corollary: If we choose not to purchase health insurance, should something go wrong, it's the individual's responsibility -- not society's -- to cover the cost.)

Obviously, you see things very differently.

All I'll say anymore on this is: May you get all that you ask for.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2011, 10:10 PM  
Senior Member
 
Jake7's Avatar

Honolulu, Hawaii
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,294 | Kudos: +135
Images: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedJeepXJ View Post
note: you still have not answered my question

I will restate it here and simplifiy it. Between these two options which one is preferable? 20 more years of our existing healthcare issues and problems, or "ObamaCare"?
Well, I think that's a well crafted scare-tactic question, and I don't think it'll take us near that long to come up with something besides socialism, but I'll answer it just for fun. I would much rather have 20 more years of in-check government, than unconstitutional leaps and bounds by our government to force everyone into buying health insurance.

I'd probably have our current system for 100 years, before just saying "Okayyyyy, you win, Mr. Obama. Gosh, you're so much smarter than the majority in America. I'll just let you do what you want. That's the true American way"
__________________
Discover Scentsy at Lucky Lucy Scentsy Products - an independent Scentsy consultant!


https://luckylucy.scentsy.us/Scentsy/Buy
Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2011, 10:58 AM  
Senior Member

Bristol, Tennessee
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062 | Kudos: +48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian View Post
RedJeep, my friend, you had me laughing out loud.

Your idea of rights and mine aren't quite in alignment. We have a right to work, but not a right to a job. We have a right to earn a wage, but not a right to be given things we didn't pay for. We have a right to purchase health insurance or not as we see fit, but we don't have a right to demand others pay for it for us. (Corollary: If we choose not to purchase health insurance, should something go wrong, it's the individual's responsibility -- not society's -- to cover the cost.)

Obviously, you see things very differently.

All I'll say anymore on this is: May you get all that you ask for.
you are not even looking at the full picture so yes apparently we see things differently because you are not considering all the issues.

EVERYONE ALREADY HAS A RIGHT IN THIS COUNTRY TO EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE, that is ALREADY the case way way before ObamaCare.

WE ARE ALREADY PAYING for those that do not have health coverage by having to make up for their costs, do you understand that? this bill is an attempt to get those people to PAY FOR THEMSELVES

WE ARE NOT AS A SOCIETY GOING TO END GUARANTEED EMERGENCY CARE, it's not even logical to consider our society standing for the for a second, so you have two options, the insured pay for everyone who is uninsured (as it is now) or have everyone buy coverage.

blocking this bill is just saying "in the long term" I want to pay for everyone else's coverage as in the end that is what ends up happening. you make statements against paying for freeloaders care but then support the side that wants you to continue to do so, what side are you really on?
Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2011, 11:19 AM  
Senior Member
 
Brian's Avatar

Rochester, New York
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 262 | Kudos: +47
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedJeepXJ View Post
you are not even looking at the full picture so yes apparently we see things differently because you are not considering all the issues.

EVERYONE ALREADY HAS A RIGHT IN THIS COUNTRY TO EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE, that is ALREADY the case way way before ObamaCare.

WE ARE ALREADY PAYING for those that do not have health coverage by having to make up for their costs, do you understand that? this bill is an attempt to get those people to PAY FOR THEMSELVES

WE ARE NOT AS A SOCIETY GOING TO END GUARANTEED EMERGENCY CARE, it's not even logical to consider our society standing for the for a second, so you have two options, the insured pay for everyone who is uninsured (as it is now) or have everyone buy coverage.

blocking this bill is just saying "in the long term" I want to pay for everyone else's coverage as in the end that is what ends up happening
No, I do see those things. You're thinking Obamacare will reduce the cost of doing business because more people will be paying into a system that will allow conventional care to be provided rather than emergency care.

But I know that hospitals and others involved in the health care industry will take full advantage of this and costs will actually go up because the taxpayer money trough will have been replenished.

The only way to reduce costs and maintain the level of quality is to remove all government incentives to the businesses and individuals involved with health care.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2011, 11:26 AM  
Junior Member
 
xdiver86's Avatar

macomb, Illinois
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 24 | Kudos: +13
redjeepxj You should read the bill thoroughly. It says over a 1000times as the HHS may decide or determine. That is entirely to much power to leave in the hands of one bureaucrat.
As I read most of your posts,it seems to me that your education has far out striped your intelligence.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2011, 12:00 PM  
Senior Member

Bristol, Tennessee
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062 | Kudos: +48
Quote:
Originally Posted by xdiver86 View Post
redjeepxj You should read the bill thoroughly. It says over a 1000times as the HHS may decide or determine. That is entirely to much power to leave in the hands of one bureaucrat.
As I read most of your posts,it seems to me that your education has far out striped your intelligence.
I don't appreciate the personal attack. The bill is not perfect, I never said I agreed with everything in it, EVER. So I don't appreciate you using such a lame argument of saying I support it so I support everything in it.

I will take a ~80% solution over a 0% solution, and especially over the republican plan which will just make things far worse.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2011, 12:03 PM  
Senior Member

Bristol, Tennessee
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062 | Kudos: +48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian View Post
No, I do see those things. You're thinking Obamacare will reduce the cost of doing business because more people will be paying into a system that will allow conventional care to be provided rather than emergency care.

But I know that hospitals and others involved in the health care industry will take full advantage of this and costs will actually go up because the taxpayer money trough will have been replenished.

The only way to reduce costs and maintain the level of quality is to remove all government incentives to the businesses and individuals involved with health care.
costs will go down because more people are paying in, instead of receiving free health services, as int he people who just chance and if something happens they just declare bankruptcy and/or the hospital writes it off
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Bookmark this Page!

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Suggested Threads

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.