Healthcare Ruling: Individual Mandate Ruled CONSTITUTIONAL, entire law upheld.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by dawnstar

 

Well said.
A case in point would be my ex-wife.
She relies on the government for her healthcare, part of her rent and she is on food stamps. How is it that she can afford to have breast augmentation (for purely cosmetic reasons) and new tattoos?

Hers is not a rare story.

Did you really just generalize the poor and uninsured as getting boob jobs and tattoos???

That sums up the logic amongst many posters here.

Originally posted by Honor93
actually, your MSM link has nothing to do with ACA but rather PPACA which are 2 different legislations.
when you figure out the difference, perhaps then you can form a more balanced opinion of the matter.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA),[1][2] informally referred to as Obamacare,[3][4][5] is a United States federal statute signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010

en.wikipedia.org...

Affordable Care Act shorthand for PPACA, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

en.wikipedia.org...

Damn!...Ignorance! You LITERALLY don't know the first thing about the bill...but on ATS, that makes you an expert!

reply to post by butcherguy


For me personally, it's not a matter of whether I can afford it, it's a matter of whether or not I want to throw my money away in insurance scams. I don't pile my money up in the yard and set it on fire, and I'm not going to just throw it away on insurance, either.

Now, if they just want to leave me for dead, that's fine with me - just man up and state that to be the objective, keep their furry mitts off of my spending decisions and health care decisions, and leave me for dead, to fend for myself. I'm good with that.

I'm mildly curious about where this "penalty tax" is destined to go - into a government insurance program, or just into the ether. I'd sort of like to hear where they think that money will go, but in the end I'm not going to pay it either way, so it's really a moot point for me.

I will respond to this ridiculousness by quoting Dave Rubin:

Only in America would so many fat, diabetic people with heart disease be upset that they will be getting healthcare

Absolutely idiotic ass backwards logic americans have... I can't wait for this empire to finally fall once and for all so its people can be liberated from sheer stupidity...

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by dawnstar

 

Well said.
A case in point would be my ex-wife.
She relies on the government for her healthcare, part of her rent and she is on food stamps. How is it that she can afford to have breast augmentation (for purely cosmetic reasons) and new tattoos?

Hers is not a rare story.

Did you really just generalize the poor and uninsured as getting boob jobs and tattoos???

That sums up the logic amongst many posters here.

Did you just call my citing one case generalizing?

I didn't lump everyone in that category. You just said that I did.
That really isn't very honest of you to do that, but hey, if that's what you have... you go with it.

That case that I cited... She doesn't have anything preventing her from getting a full-time job. I have the kids, she pays no support. She chooses to work part time and let the government support her.
If you think that there is not a culture out there that lives this way, then you are naive and misinformed.

It is a problem, people taking advantage of the system and taking advantage of tax money, when they can do it on their own, if they were proud enough.

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by dawnstar

 

Well said.
A case in point would be my ex-wife.
She relies on the government for her healthcare, part of her rent and she is on food stamps. How is it that she can afford to have breast augmentation (for purely cosmetic reasons) and new tattoos?

Hers is not a rare story.

Did you really just generalize the poor and uninsured as getting boob jobs and tattoos???

That sums up the logic amongst many posters here.

Did you just call my citing one case generalizing?

Originally posted by butcherguy
A case in point would be my ex-wife.
She relies on the government for her healthcare, part of her rent and she is on food stamps. How is it that she can afford to have breast augmentation (for purely cosmetic reasons) and new tattoos?

Hers is not a rare story.

Looked like you had the paintbrush out to me?

reply to post by Indigo5
And you think there isn't a culture out there that takes advantage of the system?

I am not saying that it is even the majority of the poor, but it does exist. If you want to make light of the situation and try to play games, fine. You won't be a part of a solution, but a facilitator for the continued existence of the problem.

I'm sorry, maybe you wouldn't know about it, sitting up there in your ivory tower. I have listened to welfare moms teaching others the finer points of scamming the system to get more benefits illegally.

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by Honor93
so again, due to your neglect of your own health (or hers as the case may be), you now expect everyone else to shoulder your burden.
how is that fair to anyone but you?

Wrong on all counts...not interested in arguing with ignorance.

She was un-insured, she did not neglect her health and I expect no one to shoulder any burden. I paid for it out of pocket. You are working hard to position what happened to my wife in a context that affords you to make a mindless idealogical rebutal and frankly, why should I care?

actually i'm not --> it is you who is implying that your bill for your wife was unreasonable and should have been paid by others, that's not my argument.

i suggested that her "excessive emergency care" could have been avoided had you responded when her body said so rather wait until the "last minute" and require major intervention.
that's a fact.

you should care because you could have negotiated that bill to a more acceptable amount but chose not to, then you come here and whine about your burden and how it belongs on everyone else's shoulders.

i simply disagreed with you and am disappointed that you're taking it personally.
my mindless idealogical rebuttal is based on personal and professional experience (like yours) and facts (like yours), so how is my rebuttal of any less value than your whine ??
does yours come with cheese

Having everyone insured SAVES money...for everyone

REALLY ??
how's that working out for the home insurers who have had to close their doors and leave states because they couldn't afford to "insure everyone" ?

the auto insurance industry, how's that working out ??
auto ins. rates have been climbing annually for at least 5 or more years, yet ppl still have an option, not a mandate to provide Un-insured motorist coverage on their policies.

actually, early diagnosis is a great thing but there was no need for the monstrosity known as ObamaCare to employ preventative measures.
also, preventative measures begin at home, not the doctors office.

as for saving Trillions, eliminate the FRAUD and watch the $$ balance out naturally.

reply to post by Indigo5

Damn!...Ignorance! You LITERALLY don't know the first thing about the bill...but on ATS, that makes you an expert!

actually, IF you had a clue, you could almost be effective, however, the ACA abbreviation applies to so many different topics and groups that your insistance it is one over another just goes to show how juvenile you can be.

from a source site for ACA (not wiki) ... that's a .com btw, it has nothing to do with PPACA

www.aca.com...
Founded in 1997, ACA Financial Guaranty Corporation is a monoline bond insurance company licensed in 50 states and 5 territories and regulated by the Maryland Insurance Administration

and from the ACA.org site, you'll find this ...

www.aca.org...
The American Correctional Association is the oldest and largest international correctional association in the world. ACA serves all disciplines within the corrections profession and is dedicated to excellence in every aspect of the field.

so, when and IF you decide to use the proper abbreviation, i'll quit hounding you about it.

fyi, the ACA.org has been around the longest so the ACA should go to them and the PPACA belongs on ObamaCare / ObeyMeCare / Oblamocare or whatever version it's called today.

for someone who doesn't even reference the correct abbreviation, how could any of us believe that you even bothered to read the legislation.
oh that's right, Wiki is your main/sole source, that's why

reply to post by Indigo5

"Hers" is not a rare story, i could share about a dozen of them but that still isn't generalizing like you're trying to imply.

it's a bummer to realize that's all you've got left.
especially since all your other arguments have been proven either outright lies, exaggerations or total BS.

reply to post by Indigo5

You LITERALLY don't know the first thing about the bill

well ok, let's just pretend that statement is true ... so, since i don't know anything about it, please answer the question that has been posed by two other posters, please ??

question --> If i choose to go without Obamacare and cannot afford the "penalty", who pays my portion ??

i understand the truth hurts, but if i keep a band-aid handy, will you at least, try

reply to post by Honor93


www.health.ny.gov...

there are many kids in the country that are recieving some type of assistance with their healthcare cost from the gov't. are you a taxpayer, then right now, you are paying for nervous parents to bring their children to the doctors for what amounts to a runny nose. I've lived in the poorer sections of cities, and I know it's quite common!!!

so, well, you are burdened now for that, every taxpayer is, including me. I was when I was unable to work and uninsured and just biding time as my foot went from crap to totally disfunctional....
ya, my family could pay for money for all the poor could get super healthcare, but it wasn't enough for me to be able to actually go through the hoops and get myself treated. nope, I ended up finally quitting the job, heck, I was falling down at times trying to do the job, so I ain't gonna apologize for that one! I was also totally broke! the danged doctors, who weren't doing much of anything useful, well, they were eating up more than I made!

so, well, I am just pointing out one of the main problems with the system!!
it the taxpayers cannot find the means to obtain the healthcare they need, then the gov't does not have any business taking money from them to give to the "poor" so that they can have a better quality of life than the ones footing the tab!!!

obamacare does not do a danged thing to solve this. it just insists you shell out money, even if you don't have it! probably one of the reasons why we have so many people with no ambititon to be self sufficient!! you are screwed if you try!!

reply to post by Indigo5


how can you justify taking money from group a, who are working hard, doing their best but just can't afford the health insurance premiums, regardless of what the stupid social service income charts tell them, even though they too also need the healthcare, they just can't come up with the funds for $100-$200 perscriptions to prevent this disease or that, money for test after test, a hundred or two for the ten minute visit to a specialist, ect, ect....
how do you justify taking money from them, to turn around and give it to someone who meets your defination of poor? and once you do that, haven't you just made those taxpayers in reality, poorer than the poor you are helping???

Just an observation...

Leave it to OutKast's thread on the "Healthcare Ruling" to bring him to 666 Flags.

reply to post by Indigo5


I sat and watched my foot go from crap to totally disfunctional, spend alot of money one doctors in the process and well, ended up quitting my job and losing my insurance because it was tied with employment (obama care does nothing about that problem either, does it?? )
then I went I'd say, around six months to a year, not able to afford to feed the family on a daily basis, so I was eating every other day quite alot so the rest could eat. asking for help, not recieving it..

if the danged healthcare system isn't able to take care of the problems I know, they know, I am having, why on earth would I want to waste money worrying about the could be's and would bes???

Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by Indigo5

 

I sat and watched my foot go from crap to totally disfunctional, spend alot of money one doctors in the process and well, ended up quitting my job and losing my insurance because it was tied with employment (obama care does nothing about that problem either, does it?? )

Yes it does. That is precisely what it does. You do not lose insurance when you change employers, if you work for yourself you can still get insurance...if you are unemployed you will get insurance with subsidies paying for it if need be.

Originally posted by dawnstar
then I went I'd say, around six months to a year, not able to afford to feed the family on a daily basis, so I was eating every other day quite alot so the rest could eat. asking for help, not recieving it..

if the danged healthcare system isn't able to take care of the problems I know, they know, I am having, why on earth would I want to waste money worrying about the could be's and would bes???

Have you figured out what insurance will cost you under the reform?

You seem genuinely confused about your options and what the reforms provide...and honestly you sound like you need help,

Is your foot issue nerve related? Compression?

reply to post by Indigo5


I'm insured at the moment, by my employers, the foot finally broke, and my guess would be that allieved some of the symtoms, but I can still find myself having to do that job with numbed feet and legs which is how I broke the foot to begin with, it was like stepping on feet of jelly or something.

romney care, as far as I know, would offer me no help. and I did check around on their website and looked. my guess the subsidies will got to those who are basically qualifying for the help that is out there now, maybe include a group of people of a little higher income in proportion to their family size. I'm kind of one of those who have been in that crack people refer to, ya know, too rich to get any help from the gov't, too poor to actually live...
maybe it's just my experience to date but I don't expect them to actually help!! they haven't till now, they aren't going to!
my question was serious by the way....how can you, the gov't, the far right who are griping about any thought of expanding any program , or the far left who are who are just giving the same group of people help and more help with more and more programs? how can you justify taking money from the taxpayers to give to others so that they can live at a better standard of living than the ones you just took the money from??

reply to post by dawnstar
yes, i'm well aware of the "need" throughout the country and how well it's being met
(pretty darn good in alot of places)

yeah, me too ... there is a "clinic" in 3 different locations in this city alone and yours is much bigger than mine.

and no, am not currently an income taxpayer nor do i have plans to be.

i've been burdened with that all the days of the last 40yrs or so, what's new ??

sorry to hear about the foot but moreso about the dr dilemma you endured.
unfortunately, it's all too common a tale.

i'm glad you see it (the system problems), not many are blind to the situation (a few along the way) but it still won't be "fixed" with Obamacare.

thanks for taking the time and interest to respond.
thanks for noticing there really are problems that PPACA simply doesn't address.

i was surprised to read a story the other day that stated lawmakers have already drafted 13,000 pages of new regulations to apply with Obamacare
as much as i enjoy reading, i'm dreading this whole concept.

since you mentioned a foot, i'll share a short tale from around 2005.
a buddy severely injured his foot/ankle in a motorcycle accident at home (via stupid human behavior). He was EMS'd to the hospital and underwent surgery (yes he was insured). About 5 days later, during a visit, i noticed his appearance was deteriorating rather improving, so we discussed a few things.

aside from his irritability over the situation, he was rather peeved that the dr didn't intend to release him for at least another 4 days (weekend), so, i decided to "help him out" ... literally.

his chart indicated that they were stumped by his lack of improvement.
(just don't ask me which codes cause 7yrs later, i don't remember)
knowing this person as i do, i went home and cooked him a real meal, snuck it in and stood over him while he ate every bite and consumed the fluids (1/2 gal x2).

no, we didn't report it to anyone.
no, he didn't have a bad reaction, but by the next morning rounds, his doctor was amazed by his improvement and released him that day.
when i picked him up, we confessed to the Dr about the previous night's meal and after berating me about "bending the rules", he actually said "thank you".

(i kinda think the thanks was for removing the 'pain in his arse' ~~ but my ego likes to think it was for the skillful preparation of the meal ... however, believe what you will, i do )

Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by Indigo5

 

I'm insured at the moment, by my employers, the foot finally broke, and my guess would be that allieved some of the symtoms, but I can still find myself having to do that job with numbed feet and legs which is how I broke the foot to begin with, it was like stepping on feet of jelly or something.

My bet would be lumbar nerve compression..specifically L2-L4. The doc should have taken an X-Ray at the least or an MRI at best. Google "Dermatome Map" and see if the numb areas overlap with a nerve path. Any back pain? Your lower back/lumbar region is where all the nerves exit the spine and provide (1) Sensation and (2) Motor control, to your legs. Sometimes a chiropracter can be a comparitively cheap option.

Originally posted by dawnstar
romney care, as far as I know, would offer me no help. and I did check around on their website and looked. my guess the subsidies will got to those who are basically qualifying for the help that is out there now, maybe include a group of people of a little higher income in proportion to their family size. I'm kind of one of those who have been in that crack people refer to, ya know, too rich to get any help from the gov't, too poor to actually live...
maybe it's just my experience to date but I don't expect them to actually help!! they haven't till now, they aren't going to!

Wouldn't assume. There are calculators out there to run your income levels through and see if you qualify for subsidies.

Originally posted by dawnstar
my question was serious by the way....how can you, the gov't, the far right who are griping about any thought of expanding any program , or the far left who are who are just giving the same group of people help and more help with more and more programs? how can you justify taking money from the taxpayers to give to others so that they can live at a better standard of living than the ones you just took the money from??

Because it will save everyone money in the long haul. The same reason an indivdual policy is more expensive than a "pool" of people...larger the pool, more differed the risk and less adminstrative cost.

Also because when everybody is insured, diseases are caught early and that saves trillions. Many people wait until they are on Medicare or until they land a job to see the doctor. Diabetes caught early vs. late is exponentially cheaper to treat.

Lastly, because when the hospital gets stiffed on a bill they pass along the costs to everyone else. We already pay for those emergency room visits that other people don't pay for.

reply to post by dawnstar

I can still find myself having to do that job with numbed feet and legs which is how I broke the foot to begin with, it was like stepping on feet of jelly or something.

that reads like a case of DVT (deep vein thrombosis) or something similar.
not diabetic are ya ??

I'm kind of one of those who have been in that crack people refer to, ya know, too rich to get any help from the gov't, too poor to actually live...

ah don't fret, i just knew that one day i too could be considered a "crack baby", wear the moniker with pride