Can Someone Please Explain Why Obamacare is Bad?

[ADobbs1989]

Citizen pretty well took care of anything you have to say, but I will add this (which will surely infuriate you, but I don't care):

The people who will have trouble transitioning will primarily be the people who have been relying on the government (read: Citizen's and my taxes) and haven't done anything to make sure that they can care for themselves. Again, I don't care. That they have been robbing me and will fall on hard times if forced to stop robbing me is of little matter to me.

I have planned for lifetime health-care for me and my wife. My kids are insured on their own now (including my son having precisely the plan I mentioned earlier). If someone else failed to plan properly, I don't see that as my problem at all--at least not from an enforced charity POV. Any charity I provide should be voluntary and on MY terms, not the terms of some bureaucrat or the terms of the leeches.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

You didn't infuriate me, I just don't really care much about what you say. We have a mutual respect in this way. Funny though because you help pay for my steaks and pork tenderloin, and I know this infuriates you.:banana:

 

[eye95]

And now, folks, you see first-hand the evil of socialism: the folks who revel in robbing you!

Remember, my goal is to influence those reading the threads and not posting, not often the people with whom I am discussing. It is particularly gratifying when I finally get them to say what they really feel, making their position look silly (and, in this case, selfish).

Thanks, bub. I can move on with a sense of smug satisfaction.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[ADobbs1989]

And now, folks, you see first-hand the evil of socialism: the folks who revel in robbing you!

Remember, my goal is to influence those reading the threads and not posting, not often the people with whom I am discussing. It is particularly gratifying when I finally get them to say what they really feel, making their position look silly (and, in this case, selfish).

Thanks, bub. I can move on with a sense of smug satisfaction.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

I honestly couldn't care less. If the money is there regardless of if I use it or not, then I'm gonna use it. I don't feel bad for it even 1% my family being fed when they are hungry is more important to me than anyone on this forum. Or in this world. I'll make sure at the end of the month if any money is left over I'll buy some really stupidly priced not needed food item just for you.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

What I am proposing is an economic fix. It is part of THE economic fix for the nation: the restoration of free markets. There will be some pain. Some folks will fall through the cracks. Such is always the case when socialism is backed off. It will also be the case if socialism is ended.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

+1

ADobbs can't seem to grasp that it was government "fixing" that screwed things up in the first place.

The amazing thing is how the economy somehow limps along despite the government interference. Get the government interference (crony capitalism) out of the way and things will start picking up steam again after the financial correction.

Good posts!

I honestly couldn't care less. If the money is there regardless of if I use it or not, then I'm gonna use it. I don't feel bad for it even 1% my family being fed when they are hungry is more important to me than anyone on this forum. Or in this world. I'll make sure at the end of the month if any money is left over I'll buy some really stupidly priced not needed food item just for you.

And when the system collapses and your family is starving because people refuse to pay for your food?

 

[beebobby]

Obamacare is bad because it's not single payer, like the rest of the civilized world. American exceptionalism in this case is having the most expensive healthcare system in the world and yet we are pretty far down in many areas that show how healthy our citizens are.

 

[Citizen]

Obamacare is bad because it's not single payer, like the rest of the civilized world. American exceptionalism in this case is having the most expensive healthcare system in the world and yet we are pretty far down in many areas that show how healthy our citizens are.

Oh, that was just chock-full of well-grounded, cohesive argument reinforced by liberty-minded principles.

Bwahahahahahahahhahahahahaa!!!

 

[ADobbs1989]

Good posts!



And when the system collapses and your family is starving because people refuse to pay for your food?

I'll do what everyone else who isn't able to find a job that supports their family will do. I will turn to crime, whether it be robbery or selling drugs, or my family and myself will die.

 

[marshaul]

Charity is the responsibility of the Church, btw.

The Church?

Excuse me while I chortle.

 

[marshaul]

I will be forced to buy medical care that I may not need or want at prices I would never voluntarily pay. If I don't, I will be taxed instead. That is robbery. Just so you can have your Obama-given right to "medical care." NO. Piss off.

Hard to have sympathy for a person who is on the record saying he supports state laws which abrogate medical freedom (namely: the right to use marijuana).

You reap what you sow.

Then again, two wrongs don't make a right, as I find myself saying on here so frequently.

 

[OC for ME]

Obamacare is bad because it's not single payer, like the rest of the civilized world. American exceptionalism in this case is having the most expensive healthcare system in the world and yet we are pretty far down in many areas that show how healthy our citizens are.

The most expensive administrative costs, regulatory compliance costs, not medical costs generally. Liberals always equate single payer with efficient. I wonder if United Health Care (for profit firm) was the only health insurance provider and government was not involved, at all, if liberals would be all gung-ho about single payer.

 

[marshaul]

Healthcare in the US is overpriced because the government has for decades propped up a monopoly on the provision of service, as well as the manufacturer and distribution of drugs, held by a very real cartel.

Overregulation plays a part, but the cartel advocates for overregulation to stymie potential competition, so that's really the same thing as reason #1.

The cultural belief that insurance can "save money" (when of course insurance companies must make a profit, i.e. take in more than they spend), and that therefore all medical care (rather than the merely catastrophic) should be covered by insurance, also plays a role, but again the cartel and its ("our") government have intentionally inculcated us with this belief, and competition which would balance that is largely absent. So that gets us back to reason #1, too.

Obamacare is bad because it further entrenches the monopoly of that cartel – in fact, it mandates that every individual must subject himself to their extortion. Obamacare is also bad because its passage into law was advocated by that cartel, demonstrating that it provides a net benefit to the cartel, which should instead be forcibly destroyed (and not helped in any way).

Many of the posters here (both sides) are merely repeating partisan talking points, and have little understanding of that fact. I thought I would help clear things up for the OP.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

I'll do what everyone else who isn't able to find a job that supports their family will do. I will turn to crime, whether it be robbery or selling drugs, or my family and myself will die.

Hope you are being sarcastic.

Hoped you'd take the high road, I understand those who want to collapse the system, but instead of taking personal responsibility once the system is collapses you seem to want to continue outright theft. Good luck when you don't have the armed force of the state behind you......you won't last long.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Healthcare in the US is overpriced because the government has for decades propped up a monopoly on the provision of service, as well as the manufacturer and distribution of drugs, held by a very real cartel.

Overregulation plays a part, but the cartel advocates for overregulation to stymie potential competition, so that's really the same thing as reason #1.

The cultural belief that insurance can "save money" (when of course insurance companies must make a profit, i.e. take in more than they spend), and that therefore all medical care (rather than the merely catastrophic) should be covered by insurance, also plays a role, but again the cartel and its ("our") government have intentionally inculcated us with this belief, and competition which would balance that is largely absent. So that gets us back to reason #1, too.

Obamacare is bad because it further entrenches the monopoly of that cartel – in fact, it mandates that every individual must subject himself to their extortion. Obamacare is also bad because its passage into law was advocated by that cartel, demonstrating that it provides a net benefit to the cartel, which should instead be forcibly destroyed (and not helped in any way).

Many of the posters here (both sides) are merely repeating partisan talking points, and have little understanding of that fact. I thought I would help clear things up for the OP.

+1 Much of this goes back to the cartelization of education too.

 

[WalkingWolf]

And now, folks, you see first-hand the evil of socialism: the folks who revel in robbing you!

Remember, my goal is to influence those reading the threads and not posting, not often the people with whom I am discussing. It is particularly gratifying when I finally get them to say what they really feel, making their position look silly (and, in this case, selfish).

Thanks, bub. I can move on with a sense of smug satisfaction.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

I am guessing they pretty much see the outright IRONY in your posts as everyone else does. The only accomplishment you make is beating your chest, demanding agreement, only to contradict every word you spew. You are worse than Beretta Lady, at least she was pretty.

 

[marshaul]

I am guessing they pretty much see the outright IRONY in your posts as everyone else does. The only accomplishment you make is beating your chest, demanding agreement, only to contradict every word you spew. You are worse than Beretta Lady, at least she was pretty.

Absolutely. I have so much fun with eye in this regard; he says something like "I say this not to convince everyone here who has made up their mind, but in the hope I'll influence lurkers on the fence."

And I think, "Heh heh heh. Not when the forum's done with your posts you won't!"

 

[Ca Patriot]

Yesterday the state of California announced its program for health insurance exchanges as mandated by the Obamacare law.

The information released by the state officials was very interesting and sounds very good on the surface.

For people who are uninsured they will have the option to purchase a policy with one of the companies involved in the exchange and the price of the policy depends on your income. If you read the finer print though you will see that pre existing conditions WILL have an effect on your premiums.

For people making under $16,000 a year the prices per month ranged from $50 - $110. That made me wonder how someone who only makes $10,000 a year can afford an additional $1,200 a year for premiums alone, not including other medical costs NOT covered by the bare packages.

Then I read further and they mention the overlapping costs will be covered by the federal subsidies. Hmmm......

What does this mean ? It means Obamacare is going to cost one hell of alot of money to the American tax payer and there is NO WAY its going to "not cost a dime" like Obama promised.

Estimates now say it will add $ 6-8 trillion in new debt in the next 10 years.

 

[ADobbs1989]

Hope you are being sarcastic.

Hoped you'd take the high road, I understand those who want to collapse the system, but instead of taking personal responsibility once the system is collapses you seem to want to continue outright theft. Good luck when you don't have the armed force of the state behind you......you won't last long.

What exactly is the high road when you have no food and no suitable job? Starve? There is no honor in allowing your family to suffer. Not only would I turn to crime I would do it with a smile and a pep in my step until the time I am either able to get a job to provide the food or I die trying.

 

[marshaul]

What exactly is the high road when you have no food and no suitable job? Starve? There is no honor in allowing your family to suffer. Not only would I turn to crime I would do it with a smile and a pep in my step until the time I am either able to get a job to provide the food or I die trying.

What I find disturbing is that you're unable to differentiate between the criminal and the merely illegal.

Fine, sell all the crack you can. That's illegal, but it isn't immoral.

Steal? Since you're OK with might makes right, I hope the next bigger thug robs you and your family blind and you starve. Your family, of course, deserves better than that.

 

[ADobbs1989]

What I find disturbing is that you're unable to differentiate between the criminal and the merely illegal.

Fine, sell all the crack you can. That's illegal, but it isn't immoral.

Steal? Since you're OK with might makes right, I hope the next bigger thug robs you and your family blind and you starve. Your family, of course, deserves better than that.

I don't find much to be "immoral" other than causing violence to innocent people. I would feel justified doing whatever necessary to feed my family up to but not including physically harming people. If I am robbed then that's just the nature of living in deep poverty, it even happens now, and highly centers around low income neighborhoods. Poverty breeds crime, and that would explode once government assistance is taken away. There would be only a few types of people alive if it happened. Those who already had a well paying job, those who find a well paying job, those who are self sufficient, and those who have succeeded in crime. Everyone else will die.

 

[marshaul]

I don't find much to be "immoral" other than causing violence to innocent people. I would feel justified doing whatever necessary to feed my family up to but not including physically harming people. If I am robbed then that's just the nature of living in deep poverty, it even happens now, and highly centers around low income neighborhoods. Poverty breeds crime, and that would explode once government assistance is taken away. There would be only a few types of people alive if it happened. Those who already had a well paying job, those who find a well paying job, those who are self sufficient, and those who have succeeded in crime. Everyone else will die.

Yeah, no. The government is as responsible for causing poverty and twisted market conditions as it is for "help" it provides necessitated by this self-fulfilling prophecy.

Heck, the geographic concentration of poverty itself is a very American artificiality of government. (First, enforcing slavery, then the destructive manner in which slavery was ended. Other more recent factors tend to be governmental in origin as well.)

Also, I find it amusing that you consider living in "deep poverty" to be a justification for theft, but you fail to realize that theft is every bit as harmful as physical assault to a person in "deep poverty". Aggression is aggression. There are plenty of non-aggressive ways the poor could begin to support a family without government constantly threatening them at gunpoint – so many ways only a communist would bother trying to enumerate them.