Obamacare, Healthcare, etc.

**Tyrath** · 2012-06-28 12:32

Originally Posted by ringthree

I dare you to find someone that was actually that stupid. I believe it's just hyperbole. No one is actually THAT stupid.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/peopl...e-of-obamacare

**Ragnus** · 2012-06-28 12:33

Man. And Bill O'Reiley was getting steamed over $16 muffins?

**dejet** · 2012-06-28 12:37

Originally Posted by Tyrath

http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/peopl...e-of-obamacare

REALLY!!!!!???

god we are better off without them anyways. Let them head to the free state of Canada LOL

**Kurokikaze** · 2012-06-28 12:38

Originally Posted by Talint

There's also a prevision where 80% (I heard 90% though) of health care funds must go to patient care/cost.

That's a pretty big deal.

-edit-

People Who Say They're Moving to Canada because of Obamacare

Yes it's 80%. There was no minimum before so they would give you something like 10-20% of your moneys worth and pay the difference to themselves as bonuses.

**archibaldcrane** · 2012-06-28 12:40

Originally Posted by SwampdonkeyPLD

So instead of a broccoli mandate, we get a broccoli tax. I don't see a difference between buy X broccoli or face a fine, and buy broccoli or pay a tax. It seems inconsistent to say one is constitutional and not the other.

Broccoli farmers aren't legally required to provide broccoli to people who need broccoli.

The biggest reason for this is that unlike health care, NOONE NEEDS BROCCOLI.

**Ragnus** · 2012-06-28 12:40

Sounds like charities. Had a coworker who's friend was running a charity and kept 60% of the money as "Cost of Business" when he was the only guy.

**SwampdonkeyPLD** · 2012-06-28 12:43

Originally Posted by archibaldcrane

Broccoli farmers aren't legally required to provide broccoli to people who need broccoli.

The biggest reason for this is that unlike health care, NOONE NEEDS BROCCOLI.

Neither were health insurers until now, I guess that could change.

But let me put it this way:

Buy health insurance or pay a fine - unconstitional.

Buy health insurance or pay a tax - constitutional.

What's the difference?

**Cleverness** · 2012-06-28 12:43

Originally Posted by Ragnus

Man. And Bill O'Reiley was getting steamed over $16 muffins?

He'd probably pay that over paying $4 for a single shrimp

**Dantrag** · 2012-06-28 12:45

Originally Posted by Tyrath

http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/peopl...e-of-obamacare

Read the comments below. They're funny as hell.

"They'll move back when they find out how shitty netflix is up here."
"Oh, moving to a country with higher taxes, universal health care, and 15% more expensive gas... ok."

**Tyrath** · 2012-06-28 12:46

Originally Posted by Cleverness

He'd probably pay that over paying $4 for a single shrimp

lol two different things. He didn't want to pay $4 for shrimps. He was mad the justice department was using its money to get $16 muffins at some 2009 conference, supposedly anyways.

**Kurokikaze** · 2012-06-28 12:47

Originally Posted by Tyrath

http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/peopl...e-of-obamacare

Omfg.

I'm moving to Canada, the United States is entirely too socialist.

ROFL

Archi quit talking out of your ass. If I don't have broccoli how will I eat my Sesame Chicken!?

**Dimmauk** · 2012-06-28 12:47

Originally Posted by SwampdonkeyPLD

Neither were health insurers until now, I guess that could change.

But let me put it this way:

Buy health insurance or pay a fine - unconstitional.

Buy health insurance or pay a tax - constitutional.

What's the difference?

One is a tax and one is a fine.

**Tyrath** · 2012-06-28 12:48

Originally Posted by Dantrag

Read the comments below. They're funny as hell.

"They'll move back when they find out how shitty netflix is up here."
"Oh, moving to a country with higher taxes, universal health care, and 15% more expensive gas... ok."

"Yeah, where the taxes are even higher, healthcare is automatic and a non-issue, and almost 50% of the population are atheist. Good fucking luck, guys."

You know, except for that taxes bit, really I should be fucking moving to canada lol.

**archibaldcrane** · 2012-06-28 12:49

Originally Posted by SwampdonkeyPLD

Neither were health insurers until now, I guess that could change.

But let me put it this way:

Buy health insurance or pay a fine - unconstitional.

Buy health insurance or pay a tax - constitutional.

What's the difference?

One is governed by the constitutionally secured power of taxation, and the other is not?

**Acturus** · 2012-06-28 12:49

Originally Posted by Headspace

How does this affect people in the health care field? My gfs aunt works at a radiology center and they just downsized and cited the ACA was the cause

Speaking as someone deeply invested in the healthcare field: Everyone will complain about the parts they don't like, but the end result is still surprisingly a step forward. Just a very small step forward.

As for your aunt, I can't come up with a good scenario where a healthcare provider who is looking at more utilization through this law, would downsize. The only things I can come up with are that they are eliminating non-essential personnel in preparation for a merger or acquisition with a larger company, or that they're using ACA as a scapegoat. Especially radiology, which is a commodity-priced service where profits are influenced by volume, I don't see how the ACA is directly for blame in a downsizing maneuver.

**archibaldcrane** · 2012-06-28 12:50

Originally Posted by SwampdonkeyPLD

Neither were health insurers until now, I guess that could change.

And also, you make a good point, this is a shitty go-between when it should be a single-payer system, eliminating health insurers.

**Acturus** · 2012-06-28 12:50

Also, I'm 23 pages into the written opinion, and I can already say that it's not as simple as "SCOTUS SAYS TAX!".

**archibaldcrane** · 2012-06-28 12:51

The greatest troll Mitt Romney could execute right now is promise to repeal Obamacare and replace it with a single-payer health care system.

Demosthenes11 · 2012-06-28 12:51

Originally Posted by SwampdonkeyPLD

Neither were health insurers until now, I guess that could change.

But let me put it this way:

Buy health insurance or pay a fine - unconstitional.

Buy health insurance or pay a tax - constitutional.

What's the difference?

insurers: no. actual healthcare: yes. If your leg gets blown off, you get treatment at the hospital whether you have insurance or not. This was already costing the taxpayers money through *gasp* taxes.

and roberts told you why they are different. A "fee" would be through interstate commerce, which is said is unconstitutional. a "tax" is perfectly within the scope of the president, on the other hand, as the constitution gives the office the right to tax

**SwampdonkeyPLD** · 2012-06-28 12:52

Originally Posted by Dimmauk

One is a tax and one is a fine.

Wrong, according to the court they're both taxes. However, at the same time the court said mandates are unconstitutional. That's why all the news agencies got it wrong. That was the first section of the case they read.

If Congress passes a law that says "everyone must buy broccoli," then it's unconstitutional b/c it's a mandate. If it passes a law that says, "everyone must buy broccoli or pay tax," that is constitutional. Uhh?

Right-wingers are try to spin this as a partial victory b/c we won the commerce clause argument. I'm just curious if they're in denial or if there is something I'm missing.

Thread: Obamacare, Healthcare, etc.

Thread Tools

Latest Threads

Up & Coming Threads

Hottest Threads