Obamacare Was Just Dealt A Major Loss In Court.

This slays me. You recognize that we all exist in a system (that's good), you recognize that people take advantage of the system and that's a problem that needs to be fixed (that's good too), but instead of changing the system to punish those who are gaming the system by simple denying them care if they choose to not pay for it, you want to punish the rest of us by forcing us to subsidize their insurance.

EDIT: 9 PAGES!!!!!!!!!!

Their handlers are the people who they are repeating their words for.

If you have passed 12th grade like you said you did, you should be able to figure out who they are being mouthpieces for.

No. I come to my own conclusions through observation. No public or media figure has said what I have said before either, and I generally bring news on tax law changes and abuses by the government through the tax code before any media figurehead brings it up publicly.


lol. Even if you are under the delusion that Obama is a conservative, you cannot say that Jimmy Carter is the same. But you are too young to know that, so I do not fault you from looking at what is in front of you only.

Who said that liberals are the enemy? Their viewpoints are great for social welfare and should stick to that. Their viewpoints are horrible when it comes to economic growth. Unfortunally, several liberals (including a few posters here) think that they are the newest form of God and pretend to know everything there is in the world and their word is absolute (and so on).

In case you haven't figured it out by now, since you apparently have been following my posts for years (although I only started posting in Sept. of last year), most of my arguments are against the asinine absolution ideas that several posters portray here.

But why are you on my case, and my case alone on this? Why aren't you referring to Pleebo or Jet with the same snark remarks?

If that's true, then how come their ideas and policies show otherwise?

You would be correct if this was my first argument with Pleebo, Jet or Jassik. Unfortunally for you, they have had a history of showing arrogance in their viewpoints to the point of them being "absolutely correct and anyone who disagrees with them live in a different reality than everyone else's"

I can bring up several examples just on this thread if you want.

It has nothing to do with gaming the system in most cases... It has to do with people thinking that can't afford it or people taking the risk that they won't need it and losing that bet...

We already deny certain types of medical care to a great deal of people. Hospitals are legaly required to take in emergency cases and treat and stabalize. If you want to be the person that sits here and tells everyone well if you don't have insurance well you sir can just go over into that corner and we will watch you die then by all means... be that idiot.

You don't seem to have any clue as to how insurance companies determine premiums or what contributes to rising costs or lowers them..


EDIT: YOU ALREADY SUBSIDIZE THEIR COSTS!!!! I don't think you understand this yet either...

Where's your proof in this statement?

Actually, tell us what types of medical care that is denied to start with.

You don't either.

Not many people do actually.

It is a very complicated process that requires a lot of variables depending on the ages, gender distribution, location, and other various factors in determining premium calculation for a specific group of people. ACA added a few new factors in there too, just to complicate things even more.

A lot of us were forced to subsidize these costs unwilling.

Maybe now you know why a bunch of people are complaining about ACA.

Every kind under the sun is denied if you can't afford it or don't have insurance... People are even denied the ability to obtain insurance if they don't meet certain requirements.

Are you even serious in asking this question?

Actually I know exactly what goes into calculating insurance premiums.

People complain about ACA because other people told them too lol... 99% of them have no idea what the ACA is about or how it would affect their premiums or the costs of healthcare.

Someone told them it was bad and that it would take money from them or that they'd be paying for someone else and then told em to get angry about it lol...

If you have a non-emergency elective treatment and do not have insurance that covers it, then yes, you would have to pay for it. Can't afford it? Too bad then.

Or are you going to go the Jet rout and demand that your plastic surgery to make your nose smaller be free to you?

If you need medical attention, you are not denied treatment regardless. It is in the law (before ACA too, go figure) that a hospital cannot refuse treatment to a person based on their ability to pay.

You even said so yourself.

So, I ask again, what treatments are being denied to everyone in your earlier statement? A non-answer again shows that you are talking out of your ***....again.

Have you actually calculated insurance premiums yourself?

I'll give you that. Lucky for you, I'm in the 1% of people who actually read the law. Strange that the people who read the law are the ones who are most upset about it.

I willingly engage in insurance (or at least I did), I understand how it works, everyone throws their money into a pot and its there for you when you need it. I choose to subsidize others when I pay my premiums. Now I don't have the choice as I have to buy insurance by law.

The people making the gamble and loosing are scaming the system, not because they aren't acting "responsible" and buying into the pool, but because the aren't required to pay for their own care when they loose the bet. Hospitals legally have to provide care for people who cannot pay, that's the problem, that's the scam.

No one has a right to have someone else pay for their health care.

"losing" is being a loser.

"loose" is to untie your shoes or a descriptor for a promiscuous woman.

All this shows is that you can't read KN... You're trying to make this into an argument that was never there... Never once did I say that medical care is denied across the board to every American citizen. So I'd say nice try but it really wasn't... Nausi was speaking on punishing those that don't pay into the system by denying them medical care. this already happens. unless, like I said, in the case of emergencies which you felt the need to repeat lol...

Yes, I have.

I doubt it KN. You spout the same nonsense everyone else does so if you actually read it then you probably didn't understand any of it.

No doubt that there are flaws in the legislation that definitely need to be fixed but the ACA is a step in the right direction and hopefuly the foundation for the future of our healthcare system. There's still a long way to go before we see if we can make this work for us or if we'll destroy it and return to the dysfunction we currently live in.

Everyone needs healthcare. Everyone.

Everyone should want to obtain insurance to help them afford it because honestly... healthcare is pretty unafordable in America without it.

Your idea that we should let people die in the streets because they can't afford the procedure is ridiculous.

Their health is not my responsibility, nor it is yours, it's theirs.

People die everyday. You or I paying for their healthcare isn't going to change this.

You said:


I follow up with:


You have yet to answer or even give examples as to what type of health care people are denied of receiving.

And you accuse me of not reading...

For yourself or for a group?

Tell us all the methodology in obtaining said rates to a group of people. You don't have to be super specific using people's names, just how you determine the rates based on variables you will use as your example.

I have given proof of understanding of the law. Would you like a little proof?

Just because you can't accept my argument for whatever flawed reasons you have doesn't mean that my argument isn't valid or worth considering. You just have an irrational dislike with whatever I present you.

Yes... people do die every day...

You or I paying for this does indeed make a difference... Idk if you just don't care and take the stance that well 10,000 people died today what's another 5,000?

If people had better medical care in the united states it would affect not only the quality of life but the amount of lives saved from the clutches of deaths cold grip...

So you are wrong Nausi. While having healthcare does not erase death from the equation it definitely stems it and improves peoples lives. If more people had access... I hope you're getting the picture now...

I did answer you KN... you even went on to agree with me that if the procedure can't be afforded by the person then it would be denied to them. This ranges from things as simple as dental care to annual checkups. life saving translpants or cancer treatments have been denied. every kind of care you can think of has been denied to some patient somewhere in the US. And I did say anything under the sun meaning any and every kind of treatment jsut to reiterate for you.

No... I'm not looking for cosmetic surgery but you bringing that up is just a show of you making this into something it's not again and ignoring any kind of valid issue.

It was my job at one point.

lol... I love how you can consider everyone's argument but your own flawed or irrational. You've shown no great understanding of the law and have only, as you say it, parroted what your conservative masters have told you to lol.

Where is your support in this? Or are you broadly assuming?

Tell you what. Give us a creditable source in your statement, and I will publicly state that I was wrong and you were right.

Under ACA, annual checkups are free (with insurance). Would you like for me to quote you the code section on that?

And since you can get subsidized (in a few states currently, lets see how the SC reacts to this appeals ruling) for the entire cost, then who is left without insurance? Even the poor could have gotten Medicare for free prior to ACA, but everyone forgets that little tidbit and demands that those who refuse to work get the very best insurance available....

Explain how getting a nose-job is considered health care then.

What methods did you use? If it really was your job, you should be able to tell us in a heartbeat how you did it. Why are you hesitating?

Ah, the attempt to use my own words against me. Problem is, you have yet to show that I did not provide understanding of the law and I did not provide evidence in that understand and interpretation. Good luck on that endeavor though. You will need it.

Protip: If you want to prove that my interpretation of the law is incorrect, why don't you give us your interpenetration of the law back by code sections of the law, like I did.

wat

No one ever said that. Stop lying.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/dying-from-lack-of-insurance/
http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/09/27/because-fox-asked-here-are-examples-of-people-w/196139
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/01/health/elder-insurance/index.html?hpt=hp_c2
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/22357873/ns/health-health_care/t/family-sues-insurer-who-denied-teen-transplant/
There's more information out there if you care to look. This is just something I can pull up in 5 seconds.

We're not talking about under ACA. There you go making blanket assumptions again and placing them on everyone. This guy said this so its true for everyone!

It isn't. People have tried to find ways around it but completely elective surgieries aren't.

Who's hesitating? You mean because I don't acquiesce to your silly demand that means what? there's a lot more to it than simple demographics as you seem to think...

Your own words show that you don't. Besides that... you're main argument reflects that of everyone else against it. don't force me to do stuff and why should I pay for them!?!?

Illuminati.

Are any of you guys required to do some kind of wellness check annually for your health insurance?

I'd like to see this, as I rarely give a viewpoint or opinion. Just about every disagreement I've had with you is over your allergy to facts and inability to understand words.

And this is where it breaks down. This statement can be made for roads, electricity, defense, water, sewage, trash, R&D, you name it.

By the way, if your health is your responsibility, and other's health is their responsibility, then why the hell do you want immigrants with any kind of disease treated before being allowed into the US?
Hell, it isn't your responsibility, why should you care?

we have had several outbreaks of cooties in the mines.
circle circle dot dot gimme $6,750 for your cootie shot.

You're analogy is flawed, one can opt out of public services for most of those things. We can make our own electricity, pump our own water, deal with our own sewer, etc.

To the extent that it's right, it is so for things that the individual is not capable of accomplishing itself. For example, and individual cannot defend his country single handedly, so therefore it is reasonable that his government does it for him. Is it really so unreasonable to expect that people manage their own healthcare?

It works the other way too, why not give everyone a cell phone, GMO free food, and penthouse housing too? Hell quality of life is all improved with such things isn't it, and people deserve the best, regardless if they can in fact pay for it. Amirite?

The scope of those things is varied to say the least. People in Arizona are far more capable of producing their own power via solar than people in Montana. The initial investment is also ridiculously varied. For things like healthcare, the cost is astronomical and the layman is not apt to manage their own care. Moreover, the actual act of purchasing insurance isn't health management, and a big portion of the good part of PPACA is requiring the company to provide the product it sells and standardizing the actual coverage. How would you feel if Mr. Personal Responsibility was denied a heart transplant because an insurance company arbitrarily labeled it as elective? What exactly is elective about having a working heart? Do you expect everyone to have 80 grand laying around as part of their personal responsibility? How do feel about the fact that all insurance is based on a shared risk pool and, even under the old system, many people pay for care they will never receive while others receive care they do not pay for?

The differences are actually very small between what people consider socialist and capitalist, and the actual health outcomes are being obscured by a ridiculous public debate over who's paying for what. The healthcare system as a whole is a failure and they're continuing to rake in money while we all argue of the terminology of the care we're NOT getting.

Ok so you've identified a problem, "people can't manage their own healthcare because healthcare is expensive". I disagree (people can) but I'll leave that aside for now. And your solution is to offer up the sector of life to the government because when government gets involved costs are reduced.

Could you provide any evidence of that?

I didn't say that, I said people can't manage their care because they don't understand it. More often than not, they don't understand what they are buying. PPACA required the insurance companies to provide the service they sell. I didn't say a word about government making anything cheaper. Do you even read what people write? No wonder nobody takes you seriously.

You cited costs being "astronomical", others have too so I guess by your last post they aren't?

Your "factcheck" article comes from a source that even mentions it advocates socialized medicine. How is that creditable again?

Your other 3 articles are antiquated because these were under pre-ACA rules. I'm guessing you did you search about articles that denied healthcare because they didn't have insurance. How about doing a search about articles showing those who are denied healthcare for no other reason besides the hospitals just don't want to treat them. Because your own words state that hospitals are turning away people and not providing them healthcare.

inb4 "semantics" excuse.