Discussion in 'The Fire Hydrant' started by Barbara!, Aug 11, 2012.
Which is why we don't get to hear from any other candidates in these debates.
Hmmm, who am I voting for. What a hard decision! Now lets compare the two.
Save General Motors and the car industry is doing better than before
Got us out of one war and planning to take us out of another.
Put more limits on Wall Street.
Change health care as we know it including trying to make it more affordable, gave health care options to people with pre-exisiting conditions who otherwise had a hard time before, and extended health care coverage of parents to their children till they are 25.
Creating more jobs so that the unemployment rate is now the lowest since 2009.
Abolish Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
Created a plan to knock down student loan debt.
Enacted a GREAT law that states that a college debt obligation to pay the loans will now be base on their salary.
Stop the economy from utterly collapsing.
Is a great Commander-in-Chief with achievements such as:
Taking out Bin Laden
Killing many of the top Al Qaeda members and weakening them
Saving an American women whose health was deteriorating in Somalia
Creating the appearance of a strong America in the world's eye.
Cut taxes on small businesses more than eighteen times.
Wants to give tax relief to business who stay in America and increase taxes on those who out source.
Wants to decrease military spending and put that money back to fixing America
Gave young immigrants who lived most their lives in the United States a chance for citizenship.
Mr. Let Detroit Go Bankrupt
Insulted our closes ally, Great Britain, during the Olympics
Jumped at the chance to attack the Obama administration during the Libyan attack on our embassy when it should have been a moment to come together. Even the republicans jump on him.
Encourage college students to borrow money from their parents to pay for a college education.
Wants to increase military spending
Keeps his money in foreign bank accounts to avoid paying for taxes
Constantly flip flops on multiple issues depending on the popularity of the issue.
Called 47% of Americans "victims" and felt that it is his job not to worry about them.
Has yet to give any real foreign policy plan.
Wants to take away all college loans and have yet to say what he plans to replace it with.
What exactly has this man done to make him seem like he is worthy of the presidency? Being a good debater is not enough to make him deserving of such a title. All he has done is prove time and time again that he is unfit.
There are so many people who only problem with Obama is that they believe he is a Muslim, that they believe he wasn't born here, and that he is really against America and want to destroy it from the inside out. Which is so funny, seeing as the tribe Obama father came from is a majority Christian tribe with some practicing their own African religion.
I know where my vote is going and I shall do so proudly!
great post tahla.
Thought this article was interesting:
Obama is the smallest government spender since Eisenhower.
yeah but what about the ppl who dont want or cant pay for govt health care? he's gonna tax the crap out of them (me) i think i should have the right to choose my provider, not be forced to take his health care, there is a reason i dont have health care... i cant afford it!
Actually, the Republicans added the taxes. It wasn't in the original bill.
where they should start is not allow congress, senate & house to vote on their own salaries :/
You can choose your provider. And if you don't have insurance, what will you do if you get hurt or sick?
I dont mean this to sound snarky, but you sound pretty uninformed (or falsely informed) on what is actually in the bill that passed and what it actually means.
There is a "tax" if you dont have insurance, but it is not a huge high amount. And there is no forcing to take government health care, you pick your provider, you pick your doctor, etc. The MAIN part of the bill is making it more affordable for everyone to be able to carry health insurance, to make it so college students are still covered on their parents insurance, to make it so insurances can't deny pre-existing conditions, etc.
I haven't yet read this thread the whole way through, but I just wanted to pop in and say that I can't imagine life without universal health care.
For example, I'm 9 weeks pregnant and have already had an appointment with my GP, a battery or blood tests, an appointment with my midwife and will be having an ultrasound this week-- all covered.
This. I don't understand why someone would not want health insurance - not to mention at an affordable rate. Even if you're not sick now - something can ALWAYS happen. I had alot of doctors visits this year - and I have no idea how I would have paid for it all, if I hadn't been covered. (before March I hadn't been to a doctors office in about 5 years).
In March I tore some tendons and basically messed up my elbow to the extrem. I had 2 ER visits, 1 doctors visit, and about 10 pysical thearpy appointments - and all I payed were 20â‚¬ - 10â‚¬ every 3 months. I don't know what I would have done, if I had to pay in whole.
I needed new glasses in May. I pay 50â‚¬, the rest was covered.
Also in May I had a server allergic reaction - in a strange city - I ended up in the hospitol with a ride in an ambulance. I payed next to nothing. I still have some testing to do - all of which are covered.
I'm SO SO SO THANKFUL for insurance. I can't imagine not wanting health insurance.
This is full of a lot of false info...
First of all, it won't be forced on you. Obamacare is a choice. If you want something else, you can get it. Obamacare is just there as a SUPER cheap alternative for those who can't afford or get anything else.
Also, if you genuinely can't afford Obamacare, you won't be taxed.
You say this as if Obamacare is a health insurance plan, which it is not. Obamacare is a law that says 'buy a health insurance plan or pay a 'fee/tax/bribe'. (Please note that the only reason it survived the SCOTUS is because of Congress's taxing powers, something the "D"'s insisted it was not.) Sure, it has flowery language about creating "super cheap" health insurance, but its based on very loose math that has no basis in reality and assumes that health insurance companies will just up and adjust rather than close up shop. (The tin foil hatter in me thinks that is THE goal of this absurd law.)
We can argue up and down about how to deliver health care in the USA. But the reason I believe this law should be repealed is this... Do we REALLY want the federal government to have the precedent of being able to force citizens to purchase a consumer product or pay a fee/tax/bribe? Remember, the "D"'s won't always be in charge. How would you like it if a President Romney got a law passed forcing everyone to purchase a firearm or pay a tax/fee/bribe?
I think that falls under #3?
1. The check is in the mail.
2. I won't . . . well, you know this one
3. "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."
Lets face it. Obamacare is a MASSIVE GIFT to the insurance industry. It has problems. Real universal, single payer healthcare would have been 100x better. I DO wish all the insurance companies would go bankrupt and disappear tomorrow, but they wont.
But we don't have to make up lies about it. (Oh, death panels, how often do you need to be debunked).
The main benefit is preexisting conditions. A lot of people, perhaps people you know, can't get insurance on the open market. This is a problem. Forget affordable, I know people who won't get insurance at any price. This will cost insurance companies money, which they make up by having more people covered.
A secondary benefit is cost. Cost is supposed to be constrained by a few things, starting state insurance pools for one and reducing medicare payouts (that attack line about Obama's medicare cost is actually about savings by not over paying and therefore reducing waste.)
Now, some states did not move forward on the pools until the supreme court ruled, and others are saying they won't no matter what penalty they face. Secondly, if insurance really is unaffordable you won't be taxed or penalized as long as the insurance is more than some percentage of your income. So yes, if you can't afford it, it wont cost you more.
I do doubt just how cheap the affordable options will be. Still, I don't see the point of tearing it up before its working just because some parts of it might not work. Lets actually see if it works first, there have been no large scale crises early in the rollout.
*I have a problem with calling health care a consumer product. I can say I will not buy a TV and I will never have a TV. I can say I will never use the health care system, but if I get hit by a bus I'd probably be treated long before I come around enough to refuse treatment.
Anyway, to some degree, the government does require the purchase of some items already. Clothes, or face criminal charges (not just civil like healthcare!), a house, or face vagrancy laws in some areas (even Portland tries to keep people off the sidewalks), or a car through promoting car dependent zoning.
Health insurance is not the only thing we are forced to buy. We are also forced to buy car insurance. Also, for people that don't have health insurance, they leave their massive bills for us tax payers to pay anyways... And Obamacare is a health insurance plan and a law.
Thanks for being honest.
I have no problem with 'universal' health care systems in the United States... As long as its the STATES that enact them. Just know that "free" health care is pretty expensive... Ask our Canadian friends what it costs to buy a bottle of booze, a 24 of beer, a Big mac, a dozen eggs, a liter of gas.... etc. I am not saying that its wrong, Canada is a democracy and they got what they voted for. Personally, I prefer our Republic the way it was created. A limited federal government with powerful states. Yeah, ill keep dreaming too. LOL
History proves one size fits all solutions are a bad idea.
Tell me about it... I am paying through the nose for a really awful plan because of my preexisiting conditions. So I am not saying that the status quo is the answer. But a top-down, one size fits all solution will not make anything better.
Regardless if you *think* it should be labeled a consumer product, it IS a consumer product as it stands today. The SCOTUS ruled at a time it WAS.
I do agree that health care *delivery* has room for vast improvement. I just disagree that this law is the answer, or even close to it. Government has a pretty poor record of efficency with BIG (1/7th of our economy?) programs.
Yes, I am required to purchase car insurance... But I am not required to purchase a car. I am required to purchase clothing, only if I choose to leave my home. It is entirely possible to live these days without leaving ones residence. Yet, I am soon required to purchase health insurance no matter what...
Further.... These excuses people make for the government 'forcing' us to buy things... DO we REALLY think these are good things? Does the government have the 'right' to make it unlawful to not have common sense?
For those of you who don't support "Obamacare", but are voting for Romney....you realize he wants to do the same, exact thing except it's called "Romneycare" and has HIGHER taxes...right?
Besides that, it isn't a "one size fits all" plan. There's several things you can actually choose from, just like any other insurance. It's an EQUAL OPPORTUNITY plan. As in, no one gets to jump in front of the line because they are rich. You wait your turn just like everyone else. That is why you see Big Name Canadians/Europeans getting health care in the US, even though our health/medical system is CRAP. It's just because they can drop a barrel of cash, jump to the front of the line, and you get to wait even longer.
Well, that depends on the type of Romneycare we'd get.
After a quick check of the chart on the bottom, I'd prefer the Massachusetts plan based on covering more people. His current "plan" is vastly different.
Separate names with a comma.