Return to the Hot Topics Forum | Post a Follow-Up

 o
As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Posted by tobr24u z6 RI (My Page) on
Thu, Jun 28, 12 at 6:20

Individual Mandate. This item seems to be the most contentious in the health care bill, so I wondered what you would do...


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

I suspect it will be struck down. Too bad because the entire bill is toast without it and there are some really great insurance reforms in there that many people, of both political persuasions, like.

However, I think it will rally the base because heath care reform is not an option in the States. It has to happen. So hopefully the base will be really ticked and get more passionately behind President Obama so he can do the right thing next term...single payer!!!


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

I believe the individual mandate will and should be shut down. But I believe that Obama deserves credit for putting the need for healthcare reform in the forefront. There are certain aspects of the bill that are very good. I don't believe we will go backwards, I think a slightly different approach with knowing how we are going to pay for it before we implement something so huge will be forthcoming, and hopefully in a bipartisan manner.


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

I believe that the mandate is unconstitutional, however I haven't done the legal research myself from all angles, as I doubt anyone here has, to come to that conclusion.

Without it, the legislation will not work.
I do support parts of the legislation, and believe that this time it needs to be done right, with thought, without shoving it down anyone's throat and that everyone, as we should have the first time, and I believe we were told we would be able to--have an opportunity to read it before it is voted on, including those doing the voting.

The fact is that insurance doesn't work when everyone pays the same across the board, if everyone is to be included.
People should pay according to their risk group, some more, some less. But everyone should be able to be covered in some basic policy, at least.


Free Markets Rely on Discrimination

Wednesday, 27 Jun 2012 10:07 AM

By John Stossel

"I fear that even if the Supreme Court overrules most of Obamacare (or did already, by the time you read this), Republicans will join Democrats in restoring "good" parts of the law, like the requirement that insurance companies cover kids up to age 26 and every American with a pre-existing condition.

Those parts of Obamacare are popular. People like getting what they think is free stuff. But requiring coverage to age 26 makes policies cost more.

Even Bill O'Reilly lectures me that government should ban discrimination against those with pre-existing conditions. Most Americans agree with him. Who likes discrimination? Racial discrimination was one of the ugliest parts of American history.

None of us wants to be discriminated against. But discrimination is part of freedom. We discriminate when we choose our friends or our spouse, or when we choose what we do with our time.

Above all, discrimination is what makes insurance work. An insurance regime where everyone pays the same amount is called "community rating." That sounds fair. No more cruel discrimination against the obese or people with cancer.

But community rating is as destructive as ordering flood insurance companies to charge me nothing extra to insure my very vulnerable beach house, or ordering car insurance companies to charge Lindsay Lohan no more than they charge you.

Such one-size-fits-all rules take away insurance companies' best tool: risk-based pricing. Risk-based pricing encourages us to take better care of ourselves.

Car insurance works because companies reward good drivers and charge the Lindsay Lohans more. If the state forces insurance companies to stop discriminating, that kills the business model.

No-discrimination insurance isn't insurance. It's welfare. If the politicians' plan was to create another government welfare program, they ought to own up to that instead of hiding the cost."

Entire Article Link


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

The fact is that insurance doesn't work when everyone pays the same across the board, if everyone is to be included.
People should pay according to their risk group, some more, some less.

There is so much wrong with this it makes me sick.

Lets start with Medicare - where everybody pays the same premiums no matter their age or physical condition or health demand and receive (roughly) the same level of care. You want to change that system? This is the age group with, by far, the highest demand for health care services - so why aren't they paying premiums that reflect this? $5,000 - $20,000 a month? Increasing as they get older, with those over 90 paying the maximum? Why not? That would reflect the true costs to the population.

Your kid is born with a congenital spinal deformity, heart problem, what ever - Ok, you can get insurance for the little tot if you pay 25X what anybody else does - can't afford that? Well tough cookies.

Whats wrong with everyone in the country paying the same percentage of their income, per-head, for health insurance? Kind of like that flat income tax you love so much?


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

It's struck down. Individual Mandate is down...


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

No it's not! They just interpreted it differently. The law now stands!!

Sea


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

I see some of our great legal minds participating in this forum are dead wrong regarding tneir interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Weird. Place where I got it from.. the headline said that exactly. Individual Mandate Struck down... doesn't say it any more. HM!


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

If I am correctly interpreting what little I've read, the insurance mandate would not have stood up under the commerce clause but does under the tax clause. So much for the no new taxes on the middle and lower classes argument. At least the Supreme Court recognizes that this is a new tax on those who do not have health insurance.


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

jlhug, you're interpretting it correctly. Commerce would've been no, tax is yes.


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Posted by nancy_in_venice_ca SS24 z10 CA (My Page) on
Thu, Jun 28, 12 at 10:19

I see some of our great legal minds participating in this forum are dead wrong regarding their interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

*


Nancy, your comments are more petty these days.

Why?

The OP asked how "you" would vote on the individual mandate.
I obviously would vote against it because as I said I believed it to be unconstitutional to require citizens to buy any private product or service.

Many legal scholars agree with me.

And I'm not "wrong" in my interpretation.

It's MY interpretation.

It's obvious you missed that very important nuance, Nancy, in your haste to be insulting.


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Nancy, your comments are more petty these days.

Do you see me carrying on and on regarding 'proper' gift giving?

Let she without sin cast the first stone.


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Well I sure did call that one wrong...and John Roberts siding with the Federal Government....well I surely would never, ever, never have called that one!!!!


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Nancy, the gift giving conversation was an opinion in another thread, not a smart aleck comment like you made when I didn't even address you or mention you.

You were taunting me Nancy, I know it and you know it.

You know the difference.

You doth protest too much, Nancy!

I'm getting more free rent, do I have to report it?


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Thu, Jun 28, 12 at 13:22

I'd definitely vote to uphold it, I believe this is an appropriate responsibility of government to it's citizens. It may not be perfect, but it's long overdue, and now that there is a framework, we can make it better


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

You were taunting me Nancy, I know it and you know it.

You are completely and utterly wrong.


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

"You are completely and utterly wrong."

Okay, I'll bite. Here's what you said:

Posted by nancy_in_venice_ca SS24 z10 CA (My Page) on
Thu, Jun 28, 12 at 10:19

I see some of our great legal minds participating in this forum are dead wrong regarding tneir interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

From what I read, only three posters here were "dead wrong" as you said regarding their interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

Those posters would be Chased, Msrkjun, and myself.

Chase lives in Canada, and I don't recall her mentioning that she has experience in the legal field, mrskjun either, but I have.

So the smarmy observation, "I see some of our great legal minds participating in this forum are dead wrong regarding tneir (sic) interpretation of the U.S. Constitution" pretty much leaves me.

If not me, and I am "utterly wrong" then which was it, Chase or Mrskjun that you were referring to?


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Demi, please drop it; I'm not going to play your games.


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Were I a Supreme I would say "Stop. in the name of love!"


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Posted by nancy_in_venice_ca SS24 z10 CA (My Page) on
Thu, Jun 28, 12 at 13:45

Demi, please drop it; I'm not going to play your games.

*

Nancy, YOU ARE THE ONE that made the smart aleck comment about posters here. Now you're not going to back up what you said?


As I noted, an easy question.

Three possibilities.

Deductive reasoning, and I'm "utterly wrong" and you won't
bother to say who you were referring to?

I'm the one that won't play your games, Nancy.


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

  • Posted by kwoods Cold z7 Long Is (My Page) on
    Thu, Jun 28, 12 at 14:50

Can I play?


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Sure, Kwoods.

I marked an X.

Where you going to put your O?

Don't answer that!

;)


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Duels were traditionally held at dawn - now they're all day, every thread.


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Touche! ;-)


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Duet! OH!


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Something and a tuba, usually!


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Free Markets Rely on Discrimination

It's these interpretations of capitalism that have hastened the dying elephant.

I'm tired of this death by a thousand cuts. Pound a stake in it already.

-Ron-


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

>> Free Markets Rely on Discrimination <<

John Stossel is an as$hole and would scream bloody blue murder if any of this Sh*t he expects the rest of us to put up with were to effect him in the least negative way.

Sea


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Posted by seashellsandpearls (My Page) on Thu, Jun 28, 12 at 17:20

>> Free Markets Rely on Discrimination <<
John Stossel is an "as$hole" and would scream bloody blue murder if any of this "Sh*t" he expects the rest of us to put up with were to effect him in the least negative way.

______________

"I was raised to think cursing makes you look unintelligent."
Chloe Moretz

"The foolish and wicked practice of profane cursing and swearing is a vice so mean and low that every person of sense and character detests and despises it."
George Washington



 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Whew, luckily we have 1950s schoolmarm Elvis to tell us how to speak. How did we get along before Elvis showed up?


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Frank. You DO like me :)


 o
like

Yes, I do like to make fun of you. So I guess that counts. Congratulations.


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Good thing we have free speech & creative writing all in the same effing place !


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Give them a dose of their own meds and hear them whine.

Furthermore. Stossel is a liar. Speaks volumes.


 o
RE: As a Supreme How would you vote on the

Posted by maddie_athome (My Page) on
Fri, Jun 29, 12 at 4:39

Give them a dose of their own meds and hear them whine.

Furthermore. Stossel is a liar. Speaks volumes.

*

Proof, please.

We have the proof about the lies you told about Romney Maddie.

Pot kettle etc.


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here