It appears there will be no Health Care..........

I agree the personal mandate is likely unconstitutional but the rest of the law would stand its all solidly on the side of the Federal Government and Medicaid is jointly run but states don't Have To take part they can drop out anytime they want. If they stay in they must accept Federal rules as the higher government authority however. So lets say the mandate is cut out they could opt for a regulation penalty on people say you can afford it and opt out your premiums will go up for you and any employer by 25% for a ten year period and you can't get covered for pre-existing conditions for a year.

Its not dead yet the opposition still needs to control the White House and the Senate with a filibuster level majority and there is time to let people get more information on the law. I never get this though the law subsidized the premiums and out-of-pocket costs for anyone under a rather generous income or places the lwest incomes into Medicaid so why so many of the people are upset about this is beyond me. Any single person earning under around $43k or a family of four around $88k pay far less than they think and the more low your income the better it gets. Why aren't people that support this just tell people this and other facts in a simple booklet of say 10 pages and hand them out everywhere.

I for one am voting solely to keep the law in place until it kicks in so I will vote Democratic right down the line since I benefit alot, I can't care about those that are going to have issues with it we lower income people have to fend for ourselves.

 

I could have a field day with this.

I'll agree that you've demonstrated that your ability to write is poor. It's "you're", not "your". There is absolutely no excuse for not knowing the difference. Had it been just once in your post I'd let it go, but youdidit three times which demonstrates that you never put forth much effort in grasping how to write simple English. I won't even start on your punctuation. I too struggle with punctuation and still make my share of mistakes, the difference is I care enough to work at it, you clearly do not.

You mention you're a street performer (which in my mind means a nuisance that asks people for their spare change), but you also mention that you have above average social skills. Brilliant idea, work in a call center. I know for a fact that AT&T pays their call center employees a minimum of $32k/yr + overtime, provides benefits and only requires a GED. I also know that they have call centers in Florida. Why not apply for jobs like that?

You mentioned rationed care and how that's better for you but guess what, under this new plan I'll be paying more and getting less care. How is that fair to me or anyone else who is going to get less care for more money?

One other thing,I love how you said you "make" money sponging off the government. That's not making money, that's stealing. Quit making excuses.

 

I don't think they feel that they have enough elected members to make that viable.

 

Please refrain from personal attacks. We all make grammar or spelling mistakes on occasion. Philosophical debates are fine, personal attacks are not. Thank you.

 

Lots of young people who don't have healthcare don't want it if they have to pay for it. In my early twenties I had no healthcare for two years. My mom told me I should go buy a fifteen hundred dollar a year plan to cover major medical but I decided to take my chances and save the money for more important things like putting more horsepower into my car. That was my choice. Now with the new law, that choice has been criminalizes and the option for affordable care has been taken away. The gubmint now requires a higher level of minimum coverage to stay compliant.
This law is unconstitutionall does not lower costs and will be repealed.

 

So could I. But at the point where you're going at someone who identifies himself as disabled and living off public welfare with your spelling and grammar - sponging commentary it's the equivalent of pistol whipping a blind kid.. not funny.

Wow, I just found a line I wouldn't cross. Thanks AU

edit - And Surf already handled this.. didn't read it.. sorry.

 

I'm not on public welfare like he thinks I work, live with family so am couch homeless but pay something for staying with them, pay for my own clothes and other things I need and pay taxes on my income being self-employed. The only thing I take because my family pushed is food stamps and I only get that for 90 days but can stretch them using coupons and buying food that is storable.

I'm not on SSI, housing assistance or anything else just want health care. In Europe I could pay taxes as a guest artist ,Busking is considered a performance art in most nations there, and use the system in a given nation. I had care in France and often stayed free at Busking guest houses about the nation or could "rough it" sleeping outside as long as it wasn't in a major city or town.

But for me health care is not optional and I can't afford the regular care of a doctor I need and I can't earn a good income Busking here. To be honest if I had the funds I would go back to Europe and work there as long as I could I can live modestly there and provide for myself here its to cutthroat some don't care for others needs. In Europe its assumed not everyone is advantaged so they make sure the playing field is fair to all in that all are provided for if legally in a nation true some wealthy people might do better on their own or might not but they pay the same percentage into health care as a janitor or a Busker.

As someone who lived in other nations and saw how other nations handle the health care needs of the less fortunate it puts us as a nation to shame with a selfish streak my critic who resorts to name calling obviously has. I think every citizen has a right to modest lifestyle without want a home of some sort, clothes, food, medical care and the right to work which one should do if one has a means to be productive.

I would think taxpayers would be grateful I could get SSI and other benefits if I wanted and I then would not work and meet most of these needs myself since I work I need some help but not as much by far.

 

Actually depending on your income it would be subsidized health care after 2014. Say you earn $25,000 a year and have to buy your own insurance and the plan is $4000 a year you wold pay (using 2010 income guidelines) at the highest amount: $340 a year [$28.33 a month] and out of pocket costs of 23% of the bills the government subsidez the rest.

And much of the bill is ways to save money, expand coverage and encourage new delivery models and see ing what treatments are most effective on the dollar cost basis.

And its not criminalized if you opt out you pay a tax for not getting it its clear in the amount above it would be a disavantage to not sign up and that would be for a very good plan. If you opted for a basic plan the prices would be lower.

If seen from that perspective its a good law for many people and families since this is subsidized on incomes in the low $40k for single people and upper $80k for a family of four what many would consider middle class in quite a bit of the nation. And how many citizens fall into this category? Those under 133% of the Federal poverty line go on Medicaid which is covered by the Federal government for those costs until 2024 plenty of time for states to add revenues and innovate. Then the last thing is state can opt out if they offer a comparable or better option in state to their citizens.

As for the constitutional status its likely to be upheld did you ever consider this if this is overturned then Social Security and Medicare are next those are mandates and you cannot opt out of them, the court would set a precendent that could lead to those being lost. So justices are likely going to have to be careful and look at many sides I would then consider it likely upheld with a narrow extension of the interstate commerce clause sue to the unique nature of the health care market.

I don't see the issue the safety net will help people down on their luck and take much of the risk of going bankrupt away, and the worry if one gets a major illness. These you do not see in Europe in most advanced peer nations if you get cancer in France you get treatement and I am a testament to that.

 

To paraphrase Virginia's Attorney General (whom I don't always agree with, but I do in this case) "Simply being alive isn't interstate commerce."

Has anyone thought about other options besides fixing health care? Yes, the cost of healthcare is out of control. My wife was charged $55 for a pair of boxer shorts a few years back. She broke her foot, and after the cast was put on, she couldn't put her pants back on. The doctor supplied a pair of boxers for her to wear until we got home. The bill showed the insurance company's allowable charge was $55 bucks. That's crazy, but what's worse is that the doctor actually wanted to charge MORE!

So why are they charging this much? Medical school is ridiculously expensive. (As is pretty much all school these days!) Perhaps the docs are simply trying to pay their loans.

Or perhaps it's the malpractice insurance... Malpractice insurance is also ridiculously high because Americans are so darn sue happy. Just watch TV and you'll see ads for lawyers trying to represent you so they can get a piece of the pie. We lost OB care in our area because our OB was sued by a patient because her baby was stillborn. It wasn't the doctor's fault. The patient has ZERO prenatal care happened to show up to deliver the baby at the hospital. That was the doctor's first time seeing her. His insurance company didn't want to pay to fight the case, even though they would've clearly won, so they told the doctor to just settle. Because he did, he had a malpractice claim and the insurance company (yeah, the same one who told him to settle) dropped him, and he couldn't get insurance anymore. Because of one stupid sue happy woman, hundreds of women in my rural community now have to drive up to 2 hours to the nearest maternity facility.

Yeah, there's problems with healthcare, but I'm not entirely sure the problems START with healthcare.

-Matt

 

Good points. When I was medical claims Adjuster, we used to have hospitals bill $10.00 for a couple of plain old aspirins! There was all kinds of crazy charges like that.

Abner

 

The High Court will decide its constitutional status with the ramifications if they overturn it I would think it will stand. Here is the issue if the government cannot mandate health care then how can they mandate getting Medicaire and Social Security those are mandates you have to take them in most cases with narrow exceptions like the Amish. You know that will be the next move to declare those also indefensible since they are not opted into or out of voluntarily. I'm not stupid this is the salvo in the final destruction of the safety net if the law is struck down. But you know they could simply declare health care so unique as to demand interstate commerce be invoked and add this to the precedent as legitimate they add powers to the government all the time by court consideration. That I feel is most likely that health care is used by everyone at some point ,your born aren't you, and that its structure if so unique a market one cannot seperate juristictional concerns so it must be upheld as its a Federal Law therefore supreme. The other fight requires the Republicans take both the Senate with a clear adminstrative majority ,61 seats total or more, and the Presidency. With Republican Governors messing around and angering people its likely Obama could stay in and the Senate could gain seats for the Democrats so there goes that option to stop it. Noting even with say 40 Senate Seats they could bog the law in procedure and block funding cuts until its to late to stop the law in 2014 from fully going into effect then repealing it will be much harder.

A friend who is homeless and a medic in Vietname had an alternative a Federal "barefoot doctor" like program have highly trained Medic types do primary first care, add Federal service centers for complex cases and send expensive care cases when possible abroad where care can be found cheaper even with costs of travel (India, Thailand). All paid for by a combination of a tax on overall income of 6% poor to the very rich. A public education approach building in a safety net for everyone but you could only get necessary care overall and it would be rationed if you get cancer you would get care but in Thailand not having much say in the matter. And no chance for lawsuits it would have soveriegn immunity but an admistrative court could allow suits with limited damages in "clearly negligent care" situations. It would then be optional it would be like public schools you can use them but if you don't you still have to pay into the system.

Medicaid funds would divert into this system also.

What makes the law broken its not even in effect yet I think once its in place alot of folks might like it and it becomes another vital part of the safety net.

 

.. interesting

 

Oh clarification on my post by Thailand its an example of sending patiants overseas to the best tourist medical networks for care if doing so can be done safely, costs for treatnment in India and Thailand are often 20% over the costs in the US or better in some cases. Cancer care could be done far less expensively than in the US. You can even buy Kidneys in India making those procedures perhaps preferable over dialysis for years.

But my idea is to provide care to anyone just take away the right to sue unless there was clear and open malpractice and cover the basics as cheaply as you can including major procedures.

But since this is not going to happen we need to keep the existing law and the odds are good it will not be repealed or struck down completely in the end of the court process, so we will need to plan on using that to cover everyone.