Obamacare and Romneycare. Are they scams?

Question: Isn't obamacare and romenycare going to use tax dollars to pay for medical insurance provider?

If so why? Why would they take your money out of your pocket to pay a middleman in order to pay a doctor for a service?

Why not just bypass the middleman (insurance company) and use the tax payers bucket of money as the insurance pool to pay the doctors directly. That way you get rid of the middle man who is going to handsomely profit from both obamacare and romneycare and it will save the taxpayers significant money ?

Exacly. All Obamacare is is corporatism. Obama promised to include a 'public option' but it isnt in there. Obama is a liar and a corporatist.

reply to post by interupt42


The reason is simple: Lobbyists. The insurance companies have several lobbyists pushing for these kind of legislation to go through, securing their income and profits for the forseeable future. Even if they have to bribe half of congress to get it through, it will be worth it in the end.

Ever wondered why so many crap laws are getting proposed recently? SOPA, CISPA, ACTA, just to name a few?

Same reason: Lobbyists, trying to increase their profits. It is their job, after all.

Corruption at its finest. Only this time it is entirely legal...

Corporations does not have the best interest of the people in mind, but the best interest of their shareholders. Profit. It is inherent in their design.

And someone have to pay for it, why not the taxpayer?

reply to post by NeoVain


Exactly. Why don't people see this?
Lobbyist push the laws and use the disguise of helping the people to get it past.

Romney and Obama is the SAME PUPPET. What you get with Obama, you are gonna get with Romney no matter how much he LIES saying otherwise.

Silly folks here lately who feel the need to make threads proudly boasting that they are going to vote for Romney are completely delusional thinking they are gonna get something different. Jokes on YOU!!!!!

So for the fanatical Right-wingers who feel proud saying they are voting for their candidate Romney, guess what, YOU are voting for Obama with a different look. FOOLS.

ROMNEY = OBAMA. Get it??!!!!

The only one who ISNT the SAME puppet is Ron Paul, PERIOD. If folks want something DIFFERENT, then you are NOT gonna get it with Romney. Ron Pauls the ONLY choice. But many folks will never learn...

The difference between "Romneycare" and "Obamacare" is that Romneycare was focused within the boundaries of "Massachusettes" and "Obamacare" incorporates all states as one entity.

States have the authority to "tax" within their boundaries.
The Federal has authority to "tax" interstate commerce and believe that if you buy healthcare from a company in Texas, which also has a "branch" in California, irrespective of it being an independeantly owned and operated branch, they can force you to pay since that is "interstate".

reply to post by abecedarian


My intention was not to discuss the differences between obamacare and romneycare. Rather the true motive of gov't programs.

Originally posted by HangTheTraitors

Silly folks here lately who feel the need to make threads proudly boasting that they are going to vote for Romney are completely delusional thinking they are gonna get something different.

Jokes on YOU!!!!!

I have noticed that as well. Until recently I hadn't seen much support for Romney on the internet. I wonder how many are being payed?

Originally posted by interupt42
reply to post by abecedarian

 

My intention was not to discuss the differences between obamacare and romneycare. Rather the true motive of gov't programs.

If you care to address the motives, you have to address the sources, the origins.
Obamacare was touted around as being based on the "successful" Romney healthcare plan.

Romney's "plan" was touted as successfull in part because it obligated people in the state to pay.
Obama's "plan" can only be successful if everyone, in every state, is obligated to pay.

The differences between them are the reasons one can succeed and the other has no Constitutional justification.

I was under the impression obama care was romney care;
there is no real difference that isn't due to scale or semantics

Just look at the way health care treats the vets and please also note:
That there are death panels, and there are restrictions on getting alternative medicine that works when the mainstream medicine doesn't.

Originally posted by abecedarian

Originally posted by interupt42
reply to post by abecedarian

 

My intention was not to discuss the differences between obamacare and romneycare. Rather the true motive of gov't programs.

If you care to address the motives, you have to address the sources, the origins.
Obamacare was touted around as being based on the "successful" Romney healthcare plan.

Romney's "plan" was touted as successfull in part because it obligated people in the state to pay.
Obama's "plan" can only be successful if everyone, in every state, is obligated to pay.

The differences between them are the reasons one can succeed and the other has no Constitutional justification.

edit on 5/8/2012 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)

My point is, that regardless if one is Constitutional justified or not its still B$ if they are paying a middleman.

Romneycare may be called a success or constitutionally justified , but does his plan take tax payers money to pay a middleman to cover the medical insurance for specific people in his state?

Originally posted by interupt42

Originally posted by abecedarian

Originally posted by interupt42
reply to post by abecedarian

 

My intention was not to discuss the differences between obamacare and romneycare. Rather the true motive of gov't programs.

If you care to address the motives, you have to address the sources, the origins.
Obamacare was touted around as being based on the "successful" Romney healthcare plan.

Romney's "plan" was touted as successfull in part because it obligated people in the state to pay.
Obama's "plan" can only be successful if everyone, in every state, is obligated to pay.

The differences between them are the reasons one can succeed and the other has no Constitutional justification.

edit on 5/8/2012 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)

My point is, that regardless if one is Constitutional justified or not its still B$ if they are paying a middleman.

Romneycare may be called a success or constitutionally justified , but does his plan take tax payers money to pay a middleman to cover the medical insurance for specific people in his state?

You are completely correct, I believe the estimated cost increase to MA healthcare was 5%. Single payer health care is the way to go, but as others have stated lobyists will keep that from happening.