It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How do we get rid of ObamaCare?

page: 9
23
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by AllInMyHead
 


I agree 100%.

The difference is I chose NOT to pay my children's education, because it was giving them something for nothing.

Would I prefer that the government pay for it in full? Yes, but the tax implications for our country are too high. IMO we need to legislate the COST of education, because it is downright insane these days.

~Tenth




posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Your Comment " I Believe in a Regulated Free Market " is an Oxymoron . Jumbo Shrimp is also one Straw Woman , eh?



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I am saying that Obamacare is the bailout to insurance companies in a special package. It is a backdoor bailout unlike what the automotive and bankers were given.

The policies of Bronze, Silver, Gold and Platinum work out to be similar out of pocket expenses between the premium plus the deductible. As a single male with no children, I don't have even a minor need for birth control pills or gynecological visits. But they are covered under those policies. Any policy that I could possibly purchase on my own (sans the exchanges) are not Obamacare compliant if it does not cover the birth control pills that I do not need. So despite having an insurance policy that runs oh lets say $350/month, it doesn't count when I file taxes and I must pay the penalty for "not having insurance".

But here is where the kickback comes in, the policies on the exchanges are set rates based on the County of the State you live in. What I would pay for a Bronze in Knoxville, TN is not what I would pay for a Bronze in Cincinnati, OH. Close but not the same. And because they are different policies with different prices...they have slightly different coverages...especially after the deductible is met. Same goes for the Silver, Gold and Platinum only the post deductible coverage varies wildly from place to place. For example a Gold in TN may pay 100% after the deductible whereas a Gold in NY only pays 80%-90%.

But let's say the premium for the plan you chose is $500/month. Then it is $500/month that the insurance company is paid. If you qualify for a subsidy, you might only pay $40/month...but the other $450 is paid by good old Uncle Sam to insurance company you chose for your plan. Now let's say you have to have dialysis three times a week due to kidney failure. How are you going to afford the $5000 deductible each year if you can only afford to pay $40 out of a $500 a month premium? Do you just skip dialysis until you can scrap up $5000? Most patients can survive if they skip a treatment now and then, but you really only have 5-6 days tops before the potassium build up in your body kills you. Keep in mind that it might not have been genetics that caused your renal failure...could have been booze or even OD on Tylenol. But the death panel ACA Board of Medical Advisors should help out in your treatment plans.

Oh keep in mind that your right protected under the Second Amendment is at play here too. If you don't have Obamacare (or lie to your doctor about owning a firearm if they ask) you have broken a Federal law. Sometimes you get off with just paying a fine when you break a Federal law, but most preclude you from legally purchasing firearms...well at least from a Federally Licensed Firearms Dealer. Some states still allow person to person private sales. No one knows if they do a quick Obamacare check when the FBI approves or disallows your purchase when they do the quick point of sale background check.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 12:12 AM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 

Hoping I burst your bubble a bit, but Obamacare has been good to me. My monthly premium has gone down dramatically since signing up. I have not spent ONE night in a hospital since 1962. I broke an arm, a wrist bone, had torn retina surgery, and had pneumonia a few times, once concussion..... but that's not too bad for being 55. Prior to Obamacare I had Blue Cross Blue Shield of Wyoming with a premium based on annual income and age. It has fluctuated with my income, being self employed, and for just myself, before signing up, it had been $1020 PER MONTH! In the years before it had been $530, $750, $675, but the giant increase to over a thousand a month was the last straw. I signed up. I have the silver package (there is a gold and a bronze) and I now pay under $300. I have no problem with Obamacare so far though I have had no claims yet. For me, its been a good thing. I do believe however, that the bill was in the hands of the insurance companies and lobbyists and health/medical companies for too long. I see no good reason why something as important as decent health care for our citizens should be a purely marketplace solution.
when CEOs and other top administrative people, stockholders, and so on, are getting RICH.... not just well to do, but RICH, this means a lot of money is NOT going back into lowering health care costs for regular people. You can lose your house because you broke your back, broke your leg, hip, ankle, had shoulder surgery, a heart procedure...... that is just wrong. Pharmaceutical companies included, this industry charges us huge amounts for what other countries pay far, far less. I call it gouging of the American people in order to make a few wealthy. This isn't something a person has a choice about, we need medical care at times. Affordable medical care.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Zanti Misfit
 


Competition comes from improved service, a gimmick, or from innovation. Increasing price is not typically what you would think of as a way to boost competition. Especially in a monopoly. Breaking up monopolies doesn't really work, as they immediately begin to reform. Ma Bell was broken up twice. Were it not for the advent of cable/VOIP phones, they would be due for another one. Eventually we may see the same happen with the mobile companies. Competition has shrunk considerably in that market.

You can have a "free market" that has limits on how badly it can rape/pillage the customers it serves. I think everyone can agree that it is good to not have dirty water, or e. coli spinach. Or cancerous chicken. I think we can all also agree there is no good purpose for having to pay $100/kwh for elecricity.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 12:46 AM
link   
What do middle class mean in our generation,my definintion is a home owner who is only a couple o pay checks and a very bad cough away from being out in the streets queing up for government assistance, I doubt many here were adults in the 50ts but from my understanding folks were getting paid the equivelent of $50 phr in today's money if they worked for the largest coropration at the time,ffwd to right now where the largest employer is paying $8.00 phr, corporate taxes were higher in the 50ts than now the income gap was shorter all kind of assitance were available that made for a strong middle class,the G.I bill among others,some universities were free..like CUNY and it didn't exactly sucked, it produced people like Colin Powell,Jonas Salk,Kenneth Arrow to name a few. politicians were men wth balls for instance L.B.J would tell one of his congressmen to vote for a civil rights bill he knew would not go over well in that particular district,he told him you are going to loose your seat but I want that vote!..too bad his undoing was the Vietnam war but that's when politicians had a pair on the left or the right,even Nixion passed the EPA ,today most conservative would be terrified to stand beside a guy who said climate change is real and we need to do something about it.
edit on 9-4-2014 by Spider879 because: fix



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 12:51 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


" Breaking up monopolies doesn't really work, as they immediately begin to reform "

If Governmental Legislation were in place (Laws) , Monopolies in a Free Market would be Forbidden . Unfortunately , nowadays Governments are Controlled by " Big Business " and therefore lack the Intestinal Fortitude to Bow to the Peoples Wishes and prevent them from forming . Corruption is rampant around the World in that regard today , and Revolutions were fought once the Greed of those Monopolies became to much to bear by the Economically Oppressed People that they Profited from . It will happen again and again until Just Laws are enforced by the Will of the People through the Courts or in the Streets .



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 01:11 AM
link   
My personal revolution is that I'm not participating.
I have made a deal with health care providers whereby they get cash in hand when they provide service. They have no paperwork to file nor do they have to wait for approval for their payment.
I'm writing my elected representatives voicing my displeasure.
I refuse to vote for a party member in federal elections.
I refuse to be forced to buy a product of which I have no need.
Since I quit working full time and began buying a personal policy, I've paid enough to insurance companies to buy a small home and I've never filed a claim.

How would I reform the system?
The only part of the ACA I see as beneficial is the requirement that insurance companies cover the people who want coverage regardless of past history.
I have no problem with having a healthy pool and an unhealthy pool where those who are using more care pay higher premiums. Seems fair to me rather than requiring me, at 60 years of age to purchase a policy that offers maternity benefits. Now that's just crazy. I haven't needed maternity benefits since I was 27 years old and made sure that I would never again need them.

I buy car insurance to protect myself and others should I be involved in an accident. The government gets a nice excise tax from that purchase. I have no control over whether or not I will be impacted by an accident, be it a dumb driver or a hail storm destroying my car. So I buy insurance.
I buy home owners' insurance to protect my investment on my houses and farm. The government gets a nice excise tax on that as well. Again, I have no control over whether or not lightning hits my house or a workman gets injured while on my property. So I buy insurance.
Whatever income I have is taxed by the governments.
My property is taxed by the governments.
I purchase phone and internet service and pay the government taxes and fees.
I purchase electricity and pay the government taxes.
Having just paid my yearly premiums on my houses and cars, and having just picked up my tax forms, I'm acutely aware of just how much of my income goes for these things and how very little benefit I get in return. So I've said, "Enough." and I will refuse to bow and pay the insurance companies. I do have control of my health and I take responsibility for it. I've chosen not to put it into the hands of the medical/pharmaceutical industry so most of my health care would not be covered by these insurance policies in any case as they are natural so they're considered "alternative."
There, my rant is done. I am fully cognizant that not all of us can control every aspect of our health but I also know that far more can be done to improve health by using natural cures rather than popping pills. But that's another thread altogether.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Zanti Misfit
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


" Breaking up monopolies doesn't really work, as they immediately begin to reform "

If Governmental Legislation were in place (Laws) , Monopolies in a Free Market would be Forbidden . Unfortunately , nowadays Governments are Controlled by " Big Business " and therefore lack the Intestinal Fortitude to Bow to the Peoples Wishes and prevent them from forming . Corruption is rampant around the World in that regard today , and Revolutions were fought once the Greed of those Monopolies became to much to bear by the Economically Oppressed People that they Profited from . It will happen again and again until Just Laws are enforced by the Will of the People through the Courts or in the Streets .


Pretty tall order now that SCOTUS made that ruling two days ago,nothing short of a constitutional amendment will revsese or tamper coroprate money in politics,but if folks really want to save their democracy then they had better up off their behinds put the politics of the day on hold and demand it,there is no other way,or get used to being Russia direct rule by oligarchs.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 02:30 AM
link   

AngryCymraeg
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


So, you want to take health insurance away from millions of people? The question is: what would you replace it with?


first off you don't need to scrap it you just need to get rid of the mandatory part.

then actually deal with the real issues in healthcare and insurance. namely GREED[/I] aka profits. that is where the real problems with healthcare and insurance are at. get the prices down to affordable levels and people would line up to buy it, no need to force it on people. and those that choose not to have insurance would be able to afford the services anyway.

step one is to abolish "for profit" insurance companies. put rules in place that any medical insurance must be a non profit organization, in other words they are not allowed to create profit. no investors that need their take would dramatically reduce the price of insurance.

step two. abolish "for profit" medical services. again things like hospitals and medical services being run as non profit organizations. instead of having to make as much profit as possible, just having to cover wages, equipment, and supplies (like actually charging the purchase price of medications and supplies, not "padding" up the costs for profit) used would drive the cost of medical help way down. which would also drive the cost of insurance down even more.

step three. take on the medical supply industry. there is no way they should charge much more for something than the actual manufacturing costs. if they don't want to cooperate then start up new companies and remove patent laws from the industry. this would drive the costs of both medical and insurance costs down yet even further.

step four. (have you guessed it?) take on the pharmaceutical industry, to lower the costs of medications. again don't want to cooperate? then yet again start up new manufacturers and again abolish the silly patent laws on medications. the overcharging for medications is criminal. why can you buy the same name brand medications for so much less in other parts of the world if they are not seriously ripping off both consumers and insurance companies in the US? yet again this would drive the cost of insurance down even further.

all the nACA (non affordable care act), really is is a fancy name for bailing out the insurance industry by forcing everybody to PAY them. it is doing nothing to deal with the gross overcharging that is involved in every facet of the "medical industry", which is the TRUE root of the problem.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 08:22 AM
link   

3u40r15m
Can someone point out TWO legitimate things that they personally hate about Obamacare?


Its democrat idea(half of it) and Obama pushed it.

Probably two of three top reasons why republicans hate it.


edit:

IF a republican wins next election, he would most likely copy ACA and push it and all the "Obamacare" haters will drink it.
edit on 4/9/2014 by luciddream because: (no reason given)

edit on 4/9/2014 by luciddream because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Zanti Misfit
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


" Breaking up monopolies doesn't really work, as they immediately begin to reform "

If Governmental Legislation were in place (Laws) , Monopolies in a Free Market would be Forbidden . Unfortunately , nowadays Governments are Controlled by " Big Business " and therefore lack the Intestinal Fortitude to Bow to the Peoples Wishes and prevent them from forming . Corruption is rampant around the World in that regard today , and Revolutions were fought once the Greed of those Monopolies became to much to bear by the Economically Oppressed People that they Profited from . It will happen again and again until Just Laws are enforced by the Will of the People through the Courts or in the Streets .



thank you. you have reiterated exactly what I have been saying.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


No, my argument is about past American exceptionalism. Before the 'American guilt' movement started thanks to infiltration of corporate globalism on the right and progressive global collectivism on the left, America was exceptional. Now it's little more than a marginalized, watered down pile of crap... as evidenced from the redistribution policies that take from the middle and distribute to the bottom (after the rulers and top cats take their share, of course). Obamacare is the epitome of that. The middle class gets to foot the majority of the bill, not only recieving zero economic benefits from the law, but also watching their outlays increases to ensure both the corporate profits stay robust and the have nots get enough of a break to ensure that riots don't break out.

And yeah, I don't care how often that stance on taxes is parroted, I still disagree with it. Redistributive taxation is immoral and amounts to legalized theft. If you cannot support your own, then it should fall on nobody but you. That goes for food, housing, healthcare, all of it.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 


Quit your bitching and do something. You're no better than the people you criticize. You are here and now, do something other than complain.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Goteborg
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 


Quit your bitching and do something. You're no better than the people you criticize. You are here and now, do something other than complain.


I have been...



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Goteborg
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 


Quit your bitching and do something. You're no better than the people you criticize. You are here and now, do something other than complain.

why even say any of this? You don't know what he does and doesn't do. And he didn't say he was better than anyone. Nothing in your post says anything, other than, "I am angry and want to lash out".



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 





If you cannot support your own, then it should fall on nobody but you. That goes for food, housing, healthcare, all of it.


Does that mean Canadian, Finnish, Swedish, French etc are better humans than Americans? heck i pay a huge chunk off my paycheck, i barely visit doctors, but i never complained about poor people getting help lol.


i feel better knowing i am better human being! i should stop giving to charity! i already do soo much more according to American standard.




posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by luciddream
 


I know you are a devils advocate kind of person.
With that said, can you point where burdman has staked the claim that he or anyone else is "better"? I haven't read it, and such a notion would be very contrary to the mindset he seems to espouse.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 02:46 PM
link   

luciddream
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 





If you cannot support your own, then it should fall on nobody but you. That goes for food, housing, healthcare, all of it.


Does that mean Canadian, Finnish, Swedish, French etc are better humans than Americans? heck i pay a huge chunk off my paycheck, i barely visit doctors, but i never complained about poor people getting help lol.


i feel better knowing i am better human being! i should stop giving to charity! i already do soo much more according to American standard.



*facepalm*

Is there a reason why it is absolutely impossible to discuss the fairness and rationality of forced wealth redistribution through taxation and policy without the discussion devolving into a "you're criticising poor people" quagmire? I'm not criticising anybody, I'm criticising a broken system. I am a responsible individual, as are the majority of people in America (I'm limiting my list to America because I don't live in another country, so it would be improper for me to make presumptions about the people of those countries.)

As a responsible individual, I take a lot of pride in providing for my own, for my family. This is where the majority of my issue comes from. I have yet to see one single person present a rational, natural explanation for how it is not offensive to mandate that the responsible tax payers in America also accept responsibility for individuals outside their own family. Without fail it either devolves into insults, rests on some cockamamie nonsense like "Do you want riots and rampant theft?" or ends up being entirely an argument of personal conjecture and goading into groupthink or patriotic bullcrap: "I am happy to pay my share*** in taxes to help others, why aren't you?"

***This is another steaming pile from the manipulation machine in schools and the media. Notice how frequently federal debt, costs of programs, and taxes in general are referred to in relation to individual's or family's "share" of the bill. This effectively serves as a tool to squelch some of the dissent, as people are brainwashed into automatically believing they should "owe a share" on whatever the government is handing out. The problem is that anyone who pays a net zero (or a net refund) in taxes, individual and corporate, is TAKING a share while the middle class is always looked to to GIVE a share. Hell, even that is a manipulation, it isn't giving when it is forcibly taken by threat of law. It is legaized theft.

If it were up to me, you folks who are "happy to be paying your fair share" would have twice as much in your wallets to give to charities, because you'd have that tax money to add into you claimed usual charitable giving. Massive bonus there, by the way, as you wouldn't have to watch as dozens of federal employees and agencies pick admin costs and other wastefull crumbs off that tax before giving a fraction of it to the humanitarian and human-centered purposes you feel so good about funding. Private charitable causes get many times more bang for the buck because they are run by people who lack the governments' thoughts of entitlement to OUR money.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 03:41 PM
link   
Are there problems with the plan....yes.

But you are wrong thinking people are going to go back to the days of letting people die if they couldn't afford a doctor.

It will in reality get fixed by gradually expanding Medicaid and Medicare..... Slowly......but it will eventually go to a system like in UK where there is a two tiered health care. (Perhaps they'll have a privatized Medicaid system you can use but it will be close to the Sate run system).

The only winners in this are going to big corporations. The money from the program will come from the Middle class instead of part of it being funded by an employer paid tax (like social security).



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join