Shady Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 Looks like Obamacare is falling apart, even before it gets to the Supreme Court. Not all that suprising since the legislation was so rushed, and therefore so flawed. Obama pulls plug on part of health overhaul lawWASHINGTON (AP) -- The Obama administration Friday pulled the plug on a major program in the president's signature health overhaul law - a long-term care insurance plan dogged from the beginning by doubts over its financial solvency. ... But a central design flaw dogged CLASS. Unless large numbers of healthy people willingly sign up during their working years, soaring premiums driven by the needs of disabled beneficiaries would destabilize it, eventually requiring a taxpayer bailout. After months insisting that could be fixed, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, finally admitted Friday she doesn't see how. AP This is one of the many reasons why their claims of Obamacare reducing the deficit was such a farce. Once the Supreme Court strikes down the ridiculous individual mandate, Obamacare falls like a house of cards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 (edited) And so, he becomes the president that has done next to nothing. Change you can believe in? Well, I don't know about that, but change of some kind is one the way in 2012. Edited October 15, 2011 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 And so, he becomes the president that has done next to nothing. Got Bin Laden though. That will be his campaign slogan. "I got that bitch. Right in the face. 2012." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 And so, he becomes the president that has done next to nothing. Change you can believe in? Well, I don't know about that, but change of some kind is one the way in 2012. There was a great Saturday Night Live skit where the actor playing him admitted he'd done little. All kidding aside, the problem with Obamacare is that the U.S. is a country that wants little government. Also Obamacare is redistribution dressed up as health care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 And so, he becomes the president that has done next to nothing. Things Obama has done... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 (edited) Looks like Obamacare is falling apart, even before it gets to the Supreme Court. I was never too worried about it as I figured it would never come to pass. It's not a policy most people were supportive of. It helped a few, it hurt more, but mostly it forced people to buy something - from private companies - or be punished. People who can't afford health care to begin with would be further burdened by a fine. What lunacy. Edited October 15, 2011 by American Woman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 Looks like Obamacare is falling apart, even before it gets to the Supreme Court. Not all that suprising since the legislation was so rushed, and therefore so flawed. This is one of the many reasons why their claims of Obamacare reducing the deficit was such a farce. Once the Supreme Court strikes down the ridiculous individual mandate, Obamacare falls like a house of cards. It also shows how ineffective, ie. paralyzed the US system is in being unable to resolve this issue. Successive presidents have tried, failed and failed again to provide a satisfactory model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 It also shows how ineffective, ie. paralyzed the US system is in being unable to resolve this issue. Successive presidents have tried, failed and failed again to provide a satisfactory model. What it shows is how determined the American people are not to accept an ineffective solution. We'll keep on truckin' til we get it right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 Obamacare was a half-assed measure anyway. Rather than having a single-payer system, compromises had to be made thanks to the Republicans. It's their fault it was watered down to this ineffective adaptation and it's Obama's fault for allowing it to be watered down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 Rather than having a single-payer system, compromises had to be made thanks to the Republicans.It wasn't the republicans. Many people have an employer health plan that they are ok with. Obama needed a plan that would allow him to claim that these plans would not be touched. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 It wasn't the republicans. Many people have an employer health plan that they are ok with. Obama needed a plan that would allow him to claim that these plans would not be touched. A mandated employer plan. It is the reason business leaves the states. Thanks Nixon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 A mandated employer plan. It is the reason business leaves the states. Thanks Nixon. The history of health insurance in the US includes employer initiatives to offer benefits to compete for workers in an age of price and wage controls (WW2). Rising health care costs, not the basic concept of employer paid benefits, is the main problem for business and government. Commercial health care insurance wasn't even viable in the US before 1920 largely because costs (and services) were low and delivered at home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 Obamacare was doomed from the start Both sides need to come up with a healthcare system that doesn't bankrupt hard working people who have a bit of bad luck I know someone who owned their own business for 20 years but lost it during the recession because they got prostate cancer, bills in the 6 digits... all of his hard work gone like that had to sell everything He killed himself half a year a go because he literally had nothing left This man was a success now he is dead And its not his fault Your system is unfair Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 Your system is unfair Health care is not a right....not even in Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 Health care is not a right....not even in Canada. Sure it is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 (edited) Sure it is No...it's not. Your perception is devoid of the constitutional reality in Canada. The CHA is a payment system for designated procedures between the federal government and provinces, and is technically a voluntary arrangement. Health care is not a right in Canada. Edited October 15, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 15, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 Sure it is Complete nonsense. Other people paying for your health care isn't a right. It's a priviledge. You'd better start understanding the difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 Obamacare was doomed from the start As it should have been. Both sides need to come up with a healthcare system that doesn't bankrupt hard working peoplewho have a bit of bad luck I know someone who owned their own business for 20 years but lost it during the recession because they got prostate cancer, bills in the 6 digits... all of his hard work gone like that had to sell everything He killed himself half a year a go because he literally had nothing left Makes one wonder why he spent all of his money to get well - only to kill himself. It may sound like a cruel question, but it does come to mind. Furthermore, he hardly would have had "nothing" left. If he had no income and no money and no assets, he would have qualified for government assistance. I also question whether 'medical bankruptcy' would have caused him to lose his home. Furthermore, if he had no income because of his illness, he still would not have been able to pay his bills. Getting medical treatment paid for doesn't free one from the burden of the rest of their bills. I'm just trying to understand the situation, which is undoubtedly a sad situation. This man was a success now he is dead If he owned his own business, and was a success, I have to wonder why he didn't purchase health insurance. And its not his fault Whose fault is it that he didn't buy health insurance? Being a successful business owner for 20 years, I find that it would have been his responsibility to have insurance, so it's not as if he's blameless and it's "all the system's fault." That may sound harsh under the circumstances, but we all make choices based on our priorities - and we have to be responsible for those decisions - face the consequences. Your system is unfair I suppose it all depends on one's outlook. Some people pay in a lot more to the system than they will ever get back for their own health care - you do realize that, right? They pay more taxes than what they get back in health services, while others pay in less than they receive in health services. Some of those people getting more are people who do not live a healthy life style, while some who get less do live a healthy life style - as they end up "paying" for those who don't - so is that "fair?" Fair is relative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 ...If he owned his own business, and was a success, I have to wonder why he didn't purchase health insurance. Yes, I was wondering the same thing. Basic financial planning for anybody with such assets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 15, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 I'm just trying to understand the situation, which is undoubtedly a sad situation. The situation presented doesn't make much sense. I highly doubt that much of it is real. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 Health care is not a right....not even in Canada. Any law that gets rid of universal health care in Canada would break s. 7 of the Charter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 And so, he becomes the president that has done next to nothing. Change you can believe in? Well, I don't know about that, but change of some kind is one the way in 2012. Seems to me Obama's efforts are defeated because the Repubs care more about politics than people. I'd be investigating them for investments/kickbacks/cosy relationships with insurance providers that might be their (corrupt) reasons for opposing something so obviously good for people. Reinforces my view that two party systems are useless because 50-50 divisions are stalemate. We accomplish more with a three party system - like health care - because sometimes parties have to collaborate, cooperate and compromise. When more perspectives are incorporated into legislation it is stronger and better law. With proportionate representation we'd have even more perspectives represented in parliament and much better quality legislation that isn't constrained by particular political ideology. We should never forget that our governance system was designed ... - to appear to 'represent' the many while preserving the power of a few, and - to divide the people into warring factions to keep the people weak, divided and firmly under the thumbs of wealth and power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 15, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 Seems to me Obama's efforts are defeated because the Repubs care more about politics than people. Complete nonsense. Obama had record majorities in congress for 2 years. The Republicans had no power to stop him. He had trouble passing things because some Democrats also didn't want to go along with his terrible ideas. I'd be investigating them for investments/kickbacks/cosy relationships with insurance providers that might be their (corrupt) reasons for opposing something so obviously good for people. What was so obviously good for the people? Obamacare? It's a disaster for the people. And what about all of the money Obama received from insurance companies? More than Republicans. Where's your investigation for that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 15, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 We should never forget that our governance system was designed ... - to appear to 'represent' the many while preserving the power of a few, and - to divide the people into warring factions to keep the people weak, divided and firmly under the thumbs of wealth and power. More nonsense. If by 'our governance system' you mean America's, it was designed so that there wouldn't be an all powerful centralized federal government. Learn your history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 Any law that gets rid of universal health care in Canada would break s. 7 of the Charter. How so? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.