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.

 

Why are Americans prodominantly against Obamacare?

page: 15
42
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   

It's the judiciary's Nixon-to-China: Chief Justice John Roberts joins the liberal wing of the Supreme Court and upholds the constitutionality of Obamacare. How? By pulling off one of the great constitutional finesses of all time. He managed to uphold the central conservative argument against Obamacare while at the same time finding a narrow definitional dodge to uphold the law -- and thus prevented the court from being seen as having overturned, presumably on political grounds, the signature legislation of this administration.



That's Roberts, philosophical conservative. But he lives in uneasy coexistence with Roberts, custodian of the court, acutely aware that the judiciary's arrogation of power has eroded the esteem in which it was once held. Most of this arrogation occurred under the liberal Warren and Burger courts, most egregiously with Roe v. Wade. More recently, however, few decisions have occasioned more bitterness and rancor than Bush v. Gore, a 5-4 decision split along ideological lines. Roberts seems determined that there be no recurrence with Obamacare. Roberts' concern was that the court do everything it could to avoid being seen, rightly or wrongly, as highhandedly overturning sweeping legislation passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the president.

How to reconcile the two imperatives -- one philosophical and the other institutional? Assign yourself the task of writing the majority opinion. Find the ultimate finesse that manages to uphold the law but only on the most narrow of grounds -- interpreting the individual mandate as merely a tax, something generally within the power of Congress.


In essence screw the Constitution, throw reason to the wind, why not, the American public are stupid and wont understand they have just been had.

I thought the justices should be above politics but to make himself look above politics in a court decision he makes a dishonest ruling,
www.mercurynews.com...
Saves face, in the name of EGO.

This is not upholding the Constitution it is spinning it,


edit on 093030p://bSaturday2012 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by EvilSadamClone
 



Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
I'm not against the concept per se, but I'm against the way it's implemented. I am not against the government implementing programs to help people who need it.

First of all, it's the government meddling in things that it shouldn't be meddling in.

In short, it's telling people that they have to get health care, and they have no choice but o pay for it one way or another. If you don't pay for it, you will be fined.

That's nothing more than extortion.

And the problem is that it's forcing people to do this.

And I don't see why people are okay with that.

And yes, I feel the same way about car insurance.

People shouldn't have to be forced to pay for something they don't want.

And most people just don't want this.

Basically, it's the government bullying people into submission.

And the real reason? When you trace the money, somebody will get rich off of it. Which is what this is really all about. It's not about helping people, it's all about the government increasing it's power and helping the rich people get even richer.

Because let's face it, it will hurt a lot of people because a lot of people just can't afford it.

If a person is making only $1,500 dollars, a fine or a payment of several hundred dollars is a big hit out of their paycheck.

And to top it off, many more people who will be paying into it will never benefit from it.

These are my issues with it.

This is not truly for helping people.

It's just another scam by the rich to get even richer.

So I will no longer call it the United States Of America, but the Looted States of America. It's supposed to be a government for the people and by the people, not just a select few elitist snobs who care nothing for anybody else but their own interests.




I wish I could star this many times over. You stated what I feel very well. I usually don't know how to put my thoughts into words in a coherent way when it comes to these things. I wanted to make sure as many people see this as possible.

I hate the way the OP stated it. If we are against the healthcare act then we are against affordable health care? That's ridiculous. Demonizing people because of this isn't very kind. It seems that they bought into the propaganda.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   
The whole part about being forced to pay for expensive healthcare, while having no money, or go to jail turns me off a bit. Oh and because Obama is just another antichrist and his healthcare will end up killing faster anyway. I dont want ANY healthcare from this country, all they do is try to poison us at every turn anyway and then tell you it's good for you....and of course the dumb sheep blindly believe them because they cam from GOVERNMENT FUNDED medical schools.

edit on 30-6-2012 by Phenomium because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 
THis is a reply to “EVILSADAMCLONE” who commented: “...And to top it off, many more people who will be paying into it will never benefit from it…”

In any insurance plan, the is the whole point of 100% participation is that the individual cost goes way down and one is PROTECTED FROM UNPREDICTABLE MISFORTUNE. Cnsider oneself lucky if nothing happens to you…but if it does, then you’re damn glad you have insurance, otherwise your’re out on the streets. Are you complaining about auto insurance, too? and business owners will get more productivity and less missed sick days.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
It's true. People don't like change. But I suspect that if it were "McCainCare" or "BushCare" or even "RomneyCare", the same people protesting it so strongly now would be the ones who would support it 100%...


The political "game" is in the forefront, and stronger (and more apparent) than ever! Politics is a game. If your "team" makes a point, you celebrate. If the opponent makes a point, you whine and complain. Sadly, that's the landscape of the American voting public today.
Not a well thought out statement, there is Romneycare and no one seems to like that either. Why do you think a lot of people on the right don't care any more for Romney then they do Obama.

Hate under the guise of politics won't get you anywhere Heretic.
edit on 30-6-2012 by Battleline because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by michael1983l
Why would any civilized person complain about making primary healthcare available to all instead of just those that have the cash to pay for it?

How can a population of a developed nation like the USA complain about paying extra taxes for this when their current government invests more money in war than all other nations combines accross the globe?

Just saying.


I've said it before and I'll say it again:

American's want Healthcare reform and the overwhelming majority of American's WANT A PUBLIC OPTION (similar to Canada, UK etc).

What we don't want is the continuation of the Corpratist State and the formation of an Oligarchy. My major problem is the bait and switch tactic Obama pulled. Everyone knew the Commerce clause was weak - and EVERYONE thought it would get struck down. It seems to me Obama probably knew the only option to fund his Healthcare bill was a tax, but there was no way for him to get it through Congress if presented as a taxation.
Hence the Commerce clause. He probably knew Justice Roberts would make it a tax, and viola!

My other major problem is that we are still utilizing tax money and giving it to Insurance companies! Since when do we funnel tax money into private corporations? Yes Yes I know it has been going on secretly for some time now...but this is happening right before our eyes, blatantly.

I want Healthcare reform - and I was my tax money to go to a FREE PUBLIC OPTION for preventative and small care. It doesn't have to be the greatest doc in the world - just somewhere I can go to see a doc if I have questions.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by havanaja
reply to post by michael1983l
 
THis is a reply to “EVILSADAMCLONE” who commented: “...And to top it off, many more people who will be paying into it will never benefit from it…”

In any insurance plan, the is the whole point of 100% participation is that the individual cost goes way down and one is PROTECTED FROM UNPREDICTABLE MISFORTUNE. Cnsider oneself lucky if nothing happens to you…but if it does, then you’re damn glad you have insurance, otherwise your’re out on the streets. Are you complaining about auto insurance, too? and business owners will get more productivity and less missed sick days.


You know...since it is 100% participtation, why can't we dictate to the Insurance companies that we want more nutritional doc's and healthcare based our nutrition. It seems to me that perhaps this is a great opportunity to use our tax dollars to start putting our own healthcare in OUR hands again. Since you know, we're ALL paying for it now.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   
I would vote that the majority of people that are against Obamacare is fear of Socialism. Even though there is already a lot of Socialism in America already I think people feel this would be kind of a nail in the Democratic coffin so to speak, or at least something that couldn't be so much denied. I personally am not all against the concept as Socialized Medicine as it does have a good basis for working.

What scares me about it the most is not so much the Socialized part of it as the government controlled part. For example. Let's say that you are 40+ years of age or older and you come down with a rare disease that is only treatable with a specific and expensive treatment plan. So with the new mandated insurance coverage comes mandated procedures. So let's say they don't feel there is a good reason to waste that kind of money on someone who is already over the age of 40. Not going to be able to work all that much longer, and we should use this money to treat people that are younger and can work longer etc.

I know it's not a nice thought to think about but it is a viable reality.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Very well done for raising this question.

I have wanted to ask it before but I already have my answer..."a country that spends more on a military budget, than social uplift. Is a country on it's way go spiritual death"- Martin luther King.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by TheTardis
 

What I hear in my head when I read your post is "I've got mine; # everyone else"

I am gonna call BS on your post and I will be happy to tell you why. Anyone working a minimum wage job cannot afford comprehensive health insurance unless of course the employer is paying a huge chunk of the cost. Most people in the US who have such coverage pay between $500-$800 a month just on their portion of the premiums. Of course there are cheaper policies with HUGE deductibles that are pretty much usless except to the insurance company. And it was somewhat less expensive twenty or thirty years ago but that is not the case now.

Oh, and let me tell you what you have; even if you have "good" health insurance, without the new regulations put into place by the ACA you are one serious illness from not having it. If your illness becomes financially burdensome to the insurance company they can just drop you like that (snaps fingers). They did it to thousands of seriously ill American citizens every year until the ACA said they couldn't. Then, what happens is once your illness progresses to the point you can't work you lose everything and will have to file bankruptcy. If you are lucky, you will fall into the financial formulary that will allow you to be medicaid or medicare eligible, but not if you have any assets or your spouse still works. Sorry boy-o, no help for you. If you recover and eventually get another job, something not easy in today's economy, you will not be able to purchase insurance for any price because you now have a pre-existing condition. Well, that was the game until the ACA which says you cannot be denied; not only can you no longer be denied but there will be subsidies available to help you pay for the more expensive "high risk" insurance.

I have several good friends who are staunch conservatives and when I ask them why they are so dead set against the ACA they simply repeat the uber right's talking head pundits. Most of what they say has NO basis in truth, it is simply designed to create fear and division. Sounds like you bought it hook line and sinker. So, I am asking you what are your reasons for not wanting every American to be able to access and afford health care? Death panels, everyone can get care at the emergency room and the other GOP gobbledy gook are not valid answers.

The ACA is not the best we can do, but until the American people get their collective head out of their asses and demand universal care like every other industrialized nation on the planet (and some third world ones too) it is better than the nothing, no protections, no access for the working poor that we had before. If our government would deign to stop spending more money on war than the next 27 nations combined we could probably find plenty of money to help pay for it too.

Know what...mean people suck. That means you.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Well, the White House is not calling this a tax but a penalty. Then why is the IRS getting involved......

Simply put this is the largest tax put on the American people.....simply put this is a precedent that allows the government to FORCE you to buy things.

Do you hear that sucking sound? That is all the small businesses being destroyed......and I know my leftist ATS members, Obamacare is ALL ABOUT THE PEOPLE (well, for illegals and those who suck off the government tit - ones who will get a free ride yet again and vote for those who will give them more entitlements)

Got some farmland to sell me in Atlantis?

edit on 30-6-2012 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by jaguarsky
 


What I hear from folks like yourself is, screw self-determination, to hell with individual/personal responsibility!

The government is going to take care of us!

*hugs*



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 11:13 AM
link   
You are witnessing the power of the media machine in America. Despite laws created to prevent such a monster this is what happens when the "news" becomes propaganda. The other problem is the failure of those who created the law to properly communicate the benefits and dispel rumors and disinformation.
If there is this much backlash flying around you can be pretty damn sure the new law is bad for big business and good for the American people.
People are dying because they lack healthcare and access to prescription medications and preventative medicine, the new law actually guarantees FREE mammograms for women, how is that a bad thing?
Here are a few FACTS concerning the law you probably won't see on television.....................
1. Young adults in a tough job market or still in school can stay on parent's policy until age 26.
2. Eliminate insurance company's ability to place lifetime spending caps, human life no longer has a dollar value.
3. Policy can not be cancelled when someone gets sick (yes, it was happening).
4. Lowers costs for those on Medicare (the elderly) who are at the mercy of the merciless.
5. Requires free preventative services like mammograms.
6. Increases penalties for fraud to protect Medicare from those who abuse the system.
7. Stops insurance companies from denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions.
8. Penalizes insurers who spend exorbitant amounts on CEO bonuses and advertising.
9. Funding for community health centers.
10. Stops insurance companies from basing fees on gender and charging women more than men for same services.
And the best reason of all to support the law, Romney doesn't like it.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   
I have thought about this long and hard .. but I still come to the same conclusion..

This act is still just an ACT .. it can be modified just like clay.

Great that they get the ball rolling..Its gonna be that way anyways so what the hell.

Cell phone cost are going to be Halted by means of Wifi ( oh you dont think that they can put up wireless cams to see you speeding and take snapshots of your plate #..but cant make WiFi available to Everyone ? ) .. You dont have to pay 80 bucks/month to do UNLIMITED EVERYTHING in a few years...you just have to have the phone or tablet that is capable of it.

Your in for a big Surprise when Everything is going to be Computer Everything ( already is but you just dont know it yet )

Tech is surpassing the modern world by FAR..War and Peace is dictated by tech. ..

For those that dont like new taxes..what about me that does not drive on the roads. .. I have to pay taxes for local road upkeep...

For those that Have to Pay auto Ins. .. um.. I have paid enough to Buy a full fledged auto in my life .. never used it but its there.

You have to Pay unless your on your own property and not in the US .. like say a sailboat..

I have to say is you guys picked your Reps Congs and Pres. .. your call your choice.

Wait until this comes to a head ..you will be confounded in a few years..

JG.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   
My 2 cents (for what it's worth) ......do you know how frustrating it is to get rear-ended by some idiot that has no car insurance? My point...we all hate paying for car insurance but it has to be done. When people like the idiot who hit me don't have car insurance it brings up the cost for all of us that do pay for insurance. When these rich folks opt out of having health insurance and then come down with cancer (that might have been caught with prevenative care sooner) that only raises everyone elses premiums. The penalty they speak of for not having coverage would only apply to the filthy rich.
Also...with breast cancer on the rise, Obamacare would provide FREE mammograms for women which in turn would mean earlier detection therefore reducing cost of cure/treatment. The insurance companies are the enemies in a way....taking our money so they can get their big bonuses! That needs to be stopped and Obamacare would end that.....Romney would only allow that behavior to continue.
Why are people so afraid of trying something new?! History keeps repeating itself and it has proven that old ways are not doing any good. This country is already screwed so we might as well try something new.

God bless



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   


Why would any civilized person complain about making primary healthcare available to all instead of just those that have the cash to pay for it? How can a population of a developed nation like the USA complain about paying extra taxes for this when their current government invests more money in war than all other nations combines accross the globe? Just saying.
reply to post by michael1983l
 


I guess the better question is, why have American's supported over a 1200 page piece of legislation without having a clue what was written in there to become law.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   
This is the lose of individual freedom.

It will take years for the ramification to be understood fully.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 11:49 AM
link   


Why would any civilized person complain about making primary healthcare available to all instead of just those that have the cash to pay for it? How can a population of a developed nation like the USA complain about paying extra taxes for this when their current government invests more money in war than all other nations combines accross the globe? Just saying
reply to post by michael1983l
 


I am against it not because of a 5k penalty, or the other dozen of taxes included in it. If fact, the media isn't talking about the most important aspects of the huge bill. I am against it because I don't think giving complete control of our lives over to the government "for the betterment of society" is going to work well for those who are on the wrong side of eugenics. Look what happened when we gave the government the control of our education system. *shrugs
Go ahead and read the bill, expect it to take a long time, I been going over it for months and still haven't got through it all, even though I do think I got the gist of it.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Hope4peace
 


Because the gov't doesn't need to have this much control over our lives. If they want to reform health care, then please god, do it. Just don't sit there and tell me that I HAVE to have insurance, or the IRS is going to penalize me. That's the part that pisses me off. God I wish they WOULD overhaul the health care industry, just don't shove the gov't down my throat as part of it.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Hope4peace
 


Because the gov't doesn't need to have this much control over our lives. If they want to reform health care, then please god, do it. Just don't sit there and tell me that I HAVE to have insurance, or the IRS is going to penalize me. That's the part that pisses me off. God I wish they WOULD overhaul the health care industry, just don't shove the gov't down my throat as part of it.


amen,
twice.




top topics



 
42
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join