Dems...why should your health and care be my concern?

[Rigby5]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

Which great countries are those?

Most of the free world recognize healthcare as a basic human right

False. You have no legitimate right to stick your filthy, greedy hands into someone else's pocket.

There is no "human right" to confiscate the property of others, the only legitimate rights are your rights over your own life, liberty and property

No one can complain, because ACA does not cost anyone any more.

Wanna bet?

That is because ACA subsidizes the poor only by cutting insurance company profits, not by charging anyone more.

Insurance industry profits grew, in some case quite radically, under ACA. Might wanna put that argument on the backburner.

I would agree that mandating private insurance would open the door for even more profiteering by insurance companies. Which is why I would prefer public health care instead.

So you don't trust private companies because people are corruptible and you don't want corruptible people to make those decisions.

So you want government to do it, because government isn't people, it's ...

... hmm ...

... I may have identified a flaw in your plan ...

No you don't want a for profit company to do it because they greatly increase the overhead by them skimming off profits.
If you have a nonprofit do it instead, then it costs less.
And government we control by voting, instead of a private monopoly that controls us, like insurance companies.

 

[progressive hunter]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

Which great countries are those?

Most of the free world recognize healthcare as a basic human right

False. You have no legitimate right to stick your filthy, greedy hands into someone else's pocket.

There is no "human right" to confiscate the property of others, the only legitimate rights are your rights over your own life, liberty and property

No one can complain, because ACA does not cost anyone any more.
That is because ACA subsidizes the poor only by cutting insurance company profits, not by charging anyone more.

it charges me more in taxs,,,

Most of our taxes go to military spending, and so little goes to social programs, that this is not a good argument.
If you want to reduce taxes, then get us out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, the Persian Gulf, the Mediterranean, etc.

that might be because the constitution requires a military and forbids social programs,,,

The constitution intended for there to be no standing military and instead rely on state militias when attacked.

{...
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of ...
...}

Promoting general welfare could include social programs like health care.

promoting isnt [providing at the loss of another person,,,

thats called tyranny by theft,,,

Providing universal health care you are calling "tyranny by theft"?
How come the whole rest of the world does it?

one thing I think you and many others are missing is the constitutions doesnt allow this at a federal level,,, the states on the other hand are more than welcome to do it themselves,,,

 

[kaz]

Marxists rely on the fact that a population is easily controlled if it is defenseless and all are equally miserable. You will have nothing.... but neither will your neighbors. Your healthcare will be considered substandard by voodoo witchdoctors in sub-saharan africa.... but it won't cost you a penny.

Pick a side.

Right wingers have no better solutions at lower cost; all they do is complain about left wing solutions.

Your fucking solutions have only made things worse for the middle classes

Not really.
I do not like ACA, but it has made a slight improvement for the middle class.
Premiums are more uniform, more easy to compare, no worries over pre-existing, and slightly lower.

Premiums are only lower when you get government money to help pay for them. They are unaffordable to people who don't qualify for getting Obamacare with the welfare provision

Not sure I believe that.
Insurance rates were increasing by about 15% annually, and were unaffordable before ACA.
I think ACA actually lowered them slightly, and the only increase came from those who did not buy insurance at all before, but now have to because of the penalty.

you can think that all you want,,,

but its a fact my ins went up after the ACA not down,,,

And were your insurance rates not going up before ACA?
Of course they were.

At a FAR slower rate

 

[Rigby5]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

I don't say you need to get a job and pay your own damn bills because I don't care about you, it's because I do. I want you to be a man. Do you feel better about paying your own damned bills now because I care? No huh, you actually just wanted the money, didn't you? Be honest

Typical Conservative view about healthcare


I got mine, FUK the rest of you

No. He, like me, pays for it. You want everyone to pay for those that can't pay for themselves. Typical liberal view about healthcare.

So you want children and infants to pay for themselves, or die?

 

[Rigby5]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

Which great countries are those?

Most of the free world recognize healthcare as a basic human right

False. You have no legitimate right to stick your filthy, greedy hands into someone else's pocket.

There is no "human right" to confiscate the property of others, the only legitimate rights are your rights over your own life, liberty and property

No one can complain, because ACA does not cost anyone any more.

Wanna bet?

That is because ACA subsidizes the poor only by cutting insurance company profits, not by charging anyone more.

Insurance industry profits grew, in some case quite radically, under ACA. Might wanna put that argument on the backburner.

I would agree that mandating private insurance would open the door for even more profiteering by insurance companies. Which is why I would prefer public health care instead.

So you don't trust private companies because people are corruptible and you don't want corruptible people to make those decisions.

So you want government to do it, because government isn't people, it's ...

... hmm ...

... I may have identified a flaw in your plan ...

Government has no business in healthcare. You won't find HC in the Constitution because Govt. has nothing to do with it.

Only idiots want the Govt. to provide HC for 350 million Americans. Nothing but red tape, long waits and mountains of paperwork. NO thanks.

VA, Medicare, and Medicaid work well.
I would prefer state run health care though.

 

[progressive hunter]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

I don't say you need to get a job and pay your own damn bills because I don't care about you, it's because I do. I want you to be a man. Do you feel better about paying your own damned bills now because I care? No huh, you actually just wanted the money, didn't you? Be honest

Typical Conservative view about healthcare


I got mine, FUK the rest of you

No. He, like me, pays for it. You want everyone to pay for those that can't pay for themselves. Typical liberal view about healthcare.

So you want children and infants to pay for themselves, or die?

now youve gone full stupid,,,

 

[Rigby5]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

Which great countries are those?

Most of the free world recognize healthcare as a basic human right

False. You have no legitimate right to stick your filthy, greedy hands into someone else's pocket.

There is no "human right" to confiscate the property of others, the only legitimate rights are your rights over your own life, liberty and property

No one can complain, because ACA does not cost anyone any more.

Wanna bet?

That is because ACA subsidizes the poor only by cutting insurance company profits, not by charging anyone more.

Insurance industry profits grew, in some case quite radically, under ACA. Might wanna put that argument on the backburner.

I would agree that mandating private insurance would open the door for even more profiteering by insurance companies. Which is why I would prefer public health care instead.

Which would open the door, wider, for even more profiteering by insurance companies.

Yes. The idea that a choice leads to corruption so we should have our choice removed and our decision made for us to protect us from corruption is a s dumb as it sounds.

Let's leave it up to politicians, they aren't corrupt!!!!!!

You have much more choice by voting for the health care you want, instead of being stuck with what the monopoly forces on you.

 

[Rigby5]

Hey rightwinger Rigby5 how likely is it that those begging the loudest for free healthcare are unemployed, smoking a pack of cigarettes a day, smoking weed, drinking booze, doing meth, driving drunk, having the most children...etc etc
I’m sure they represent a very small fraction....right?

Health care is not something that people can abuse.
It is only for when catastrophic things happen.
We can't continue with paid private insurance because it costs so much that our goods are uncompetitive.
We need to reduce employer costs and take health care costs away from them.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

Which great countries are those?

Most of the free world recognize healthcare as a basic human right

False. You have no legitimate right to stick your filthy, greedy hands into someone else's pocket.

There is no "human right" to confiscate the property of others, the only legitimate rights are your rights over your own life, liberty and property

No one can complain, because ACA does not cost anyone any more.
That is because ACA subsidizes the poor only by cutting insurance company profits, not by charging anyone more.

it charges me more in taxs,,,

Most of our taxes go to military spending, and so little goes to social programs, that this is not a good argument.
If you want to reduce taxes, then get us out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, the Persian Gulf, the Mediterranean, etc.

that might be because the constitution requires a military and forbids social programs,,,

The constitution intended for there to be no standing military and instead rely on state militias when attacked.

{...
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of ...
...}

Promoting general welfare could include social programs like health care.

Promoting the "general welfare" was not a power of government, it was an explanation of government powers.

The idea you're pumping that the founders bothered writing a Constitution then gave the government the power to do whatever the fuck it wants is as stupid as it sounds. Why bother writing the Constitution at all then?

“Promote the general welfare” is translated by Leftist beggars as follows:
“Force the self sufficient to fund those making poor life decisions”

 

[Rigby5]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

Which great countries are those?

Most of the free world recognize healthcare as a basic human right

False. You have no legitimate right to stick your filthy, greedy hands into someone else's pocket.

There is no "human right" to confiscate the property of others, the only legitimate rights are your rights over your own life, liberty and property

No one can complain, because ACA does not cost anyone any more.
That is because ACA subsidizes the poor only by cutting insurance company profits, not by charging anyone more.

Again, premiums are only lower when there's a welfare government benefit included. They are expensive and unusable because of the high deductibles for most people.

It totally fucked me. I had a policy that I loved. It was high deductible and cheap for family coverage. Under Obamacare the premiums skyrocketed then they cancelled it completely.

BTW, insurance company profits aren't yours, you are advocating armed robbery

The high costs of insurance is not because of ACA but due to the insurance companies high profits.
High deductibles are good.
If you want lower health costs, then we have to get the insurance companies out of it, because they are the one stealing all the profits.

The higher costs are because of the increased Obamacare regulations and shifting costs onto younger, healthier people. You don't know what you're talking about

Regulations do not cost anything, but prevent inflated and corrupt charges.
Shifting costs to younger/healthier people is the whole point of a responsible society.
But letting insurance companies extort high profits just makes no sense.

 

[kaz]

Marxists rely on the fact that a population is easily controlled if it is defenseless and all are equally miserable. You will have nothing.... but neither will your neighbors. Your healthcare will be considered substandard by voodoo witchdoctors in sub-saharan africa.... but it won't cost you a penny.

Pick a side.

Right wingers have no better solutions at lower cost; all they do is complain about left wing solutions.

Your fucking solutions have only made things worse for the middle classes

Not really.
I do not like ACA, but it has made a slight improvement for the middle class.
Premiums are more uniform, more easy to compare, no worries over pre-existing, and slightly lower.

Premiums are only lower when you get government money to help pay for them. They are unaffordable to people who don't qualify for getting Obamacare with the welfare provision

Not sure I believe that.
Insurance rates were increasing by about 15% annually, and were unaffordable before ACA.
I think ACA actually lowered them slightly, and the only increase came from those who did not buy insurance at all before, but now have to because of the penalty.

Well, since I operated my own businesses back then, I was writing the full check for my insurance and I know what it cost. Before Obamacare, I paid just under $400 a month for family high deductible coverage. In just 3-4 years under Obamacare it doubled, then they cancelled it completely and similar Obamacare policies were $1,000 a month and up because the taxpayers weren't paying any of my policy

All insurance doubled in about 4 years.
ACA had nothing to do with that.

Got it. Just coincidence insurance doubled in the first four years of Obamacare. Just pure chance. Sure it was. Surrreeee.......

 

[rightwinger]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

Which great countries are those?

Most of the free world recognize healthcare as a basic human right

False. You have no legitimate right to stick your filthy, greedy hands into someone else's pocket.

There is no "human right" to confiscate the property of others, the only legitimate rights are your rights over your own life, liberty and property

No one can complain, because ACA does not cost anyone any more.
That is because ACA subsidizes the poor only by cutting insurance company profits, not by charging anyone more.

it charges me more in taxs,,,

Most of our taxes go to military spending, and so little goes to social programs, that this is not a good argument.
If you want to reduce taxes, then get us out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, the Persian Gulf, the Mediterranean, etc.

that might be because the constitution requires a military and forbids social programs,,,

The constitution intended for there to be no standing military and instead rely on state militias when attacked.

{...
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of ...
...}

Promoting general welfare could include social programs like health care.

promoting isnt [providing at the loss of another person,,,

thats called tyranny by theft,,,

Providing universal health care you are calling "tyranny by theft"?
How come the whole rest of the world does it?

one thing I think you and many others are missing is the constitutions doesnt allow this at a federal level,,, the states on the other hand are more than welcome to do it themselves,,,

You keep saying that but can’t point out a single SCOTUS decision saying healthcare can’t be provided at the Federal Level

 

[Rigby5]

Yep. I was a business owner through the creation of Obamacare. After Obamacare I kept paying the same amount of medical for my employees, but I refused to pay the increasing amounts and passed the higher costs onto them. I couldn't afford just to absorb it and there was no reason I should have had to

BTW, pre existing conditions through health insurance companies worked the same way. Anyone with a pre-existing condition paid a higher policy. They were not rejected, that implication and statement was totally fking wrong. And, the only policy up tick was for the first year of the policy. I know, my wife was a child diabetic.

Not true.
Not only do they charge much more for pre-existing conditions, but after you had the medical expense for something like replacing a defective heart valve, they often would try to not pay, and reject the bill as a pre-existing condition.

 

[Rigby5]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

Which great countries are those?

Most of the free world recognize healthcare as a basic human right

False. You have no legitimate right to stick your filthy, greedy hands into someone else's pocket.

There is no "human right" to confiscate the property of others, the only legitimate rights are your rights over your own life, liberty and property

No one can complain, because ACA does not cost anyone any more.
That is because ACA subsidizes the poor only by cutting insurance company profits, not by charging anyone more.

it charges me more in taxs,,,

Most of our taxes go to military spending, and so little goes to social programs, that this is not a good argument.
If you want to reduce taxes, then get us out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, the Persian Gulf, the Mediterranean, etc.

that might be because the constitution requires a military and forbids social programs,,,

The constitution intended for there to be no standing military and instead rely on state militias when attacked.

{...
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of ...
...}

Promoting general welfare could include social programs like health care.

promoting isnt [providing at the loss of another person,,,

thats called tyranny by theft,,,

Providing universal health care you are calling "tyranny by theft"?
How come the whole rest of the world does it?

one thing I think you and many others are missing is the constitutions doesnt allow this at a federal level,,, the states on the other hand are more than welcome to do it themselves,,,

Agreed.
The state level not only is more legal from a constitutional point of view, but also we have more say.

 

[Claudette]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

I don't say you need to get a job and pay your own damn bills because I don't care about you, it's because I do. I want you to be a man. Do you feel better about paying your own damned bills now because I care? No huh, you actually just wanted the money, didn't you? Be honest

Typical Conservative view about healthcare


I got mine, FUK the rest of you

No. He, like me, pays for it. You want everyone to pay for those that can't pay for themselves. Typical liberal view about healthcare.

So you want children and infants to pay for themselves, or die?

No. Their parents can pay for them and you can bet if they can't the mother, no father, is on welfare and we tax payers will be stuck paying for their freeloading asses.

I pay for everything I get and see no reason to pay for anyone else.

 

[kaz]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

Which great countries are those?

Most of the free world recognize healthcare as a basic human right

False. You have no legitimate right to stick your filthy, greedy hands into someone else's pocket.

There is no "human right" to confiscate the property of others, the only legitimate rights are your rights over your own life, liberty and property

No one can complain, because ACA does not cost anyone any more.
That is because ACA subsidizes the poor only by cutting insurance company profits, not by charging anyone more.

it charges me more in taxs,,,

Most of our taxes go to military spending, and so little goes to social programs, that this is not a good argument.
If you want to reduce taxes, then get us out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, the Persian Gulf, the Mediterranean, etc.

that might be because the constitution requires a military and forbids social programs,,,

The constitution intended for there to be no standing military and instead rely on state militias when attacked.

{...
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of ...
...}

Promoting general welfare could include social programs like health care.

promoting isnt [providing at the loss of another person,,,

thats called tyranny by theft,,,

Providing universal health care you are calling "tyranny by theft"?
How come the whole rest of the world does it?

Other people committing armed robbery justifies committing armed robbery? Yeah, sure

 

[progressive hunter]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

Which great countries are those?

Most of the free world recognize healthcare as a basic human right

False. You have no legitimate right to stick your filthy, greedy hands into someone else's pocket.

There is no "human right" to confiscate the property of others, the only legitimate rights are your rights over your own life, liberty and property

No one can complain, because ACA does not cost anyone any more.
That is because ACA subsidizes the poor only by cutting insurance company profits, not by charging anyone more.

it charges me more in taxs,,,

Most of our taxes go to military spending, and so little goes to social programs, that this is not a good argument.
If you want to reduce taxes, then get us out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, the Persian Gulf, the Mediterranean, etc.

that might be because the constitution requires a military and forbids social programs,,,

The constitution intended for there to be no standing military and instead rely on state militias when attacked.

{...
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of ...
...}

Promoting general welfare could include social programs like health care.

promoting isnt [providing at the loss of another person,,,

thats called tyranny by theft,,,

Providing universal health care you are calling "tyranny by theft"?
How come the whole rest of the world does it?

one thing I think you and many others are missing is the constitutions doesnt allow this at a federal level,,, the states on the other hand are more than welcome to do it themselves,,,

You keep saying that but can’t point out a single SCOTUS decision saying healthcare can’t be provided at the Federal Level

and yet you cant quote a single section of the constitution that allows for it,,,

SCOTUS gives opinions that can change later which might explain the outrage from leftists over the current nomination,,,

 

[Rigby5]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

Which great countries are those?

Most of the free world recognize healthcare as a basic human right

False. You have no legitimate right to stick your filthy, greedy hands into someone else's pocket.

There is no "human right" to confiscate the property of others, the only legitimate rights are your rights over your own life, liberty and property

No one can complain, because ACA does not cost anyone any more.
That is because ACA subsidizes the poor only by cutting insurance company profits, not by charging anyone more.

it charges me more in taxs,,,

Most of our taxes go to military spending, and so little goes to social programs, that this is not a good argument.
If you want to reduce taxes, then get us out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, the Persian Gulf, the Mediterranean, etc.

that might be because the constitution requires a military and forbids social programs,,,

The constitution intended for there to be no standing military and instead rely on state militias when attacked.

{...
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of ...
...}

Promoting general welfare could include social programs like health care.

Promoting the "general welfare" was not a power of government, it was an explanation of government powers.

The idea you're pumping that the founders bothered writing a Constitution then gave the government the power to do whatever the fuck it wants is as stupid as it sounds. Why bother writing the Constitution at all then?

“Promote the general welfare” is translated by Leftist beggars as follows:
“Force the self sufficient to fund those making poor life decisions”

Most health care costs are not from "poor decisions".
If you contract a disease or get hit by a car, that is not your fault.

 

[progressive hunter]

Why?

Because Great Countries care about the well being of everyone

Which great countries are those?

Most of the free world recognize healthcare as a basic human right

False. You have no legitimate right to stick your filthy, greedy hands into someone else's pocket.

There is no "human right" to confiscate the property of others, the only legitimate rights are your rights over your own life, liberty and property

No one can complain, because ACA does not cost anyone any more.
That is because ACA subsidizes the poor only by cutting insurance company profits, not by charging anyone more.

it charges me more in taxs,,,

Most of our taxes go to military spending, and so little goes to social programs, that this is not a good argument.
If you want to reduce taxes, then get us out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, the Persian Gulf, the Mediterranean, etc.

that might be because the constitution requires a military and forbids social programs,,,

The constitution intended for there to be no standing military and instead rely on state militias when attacked.

{...
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of ...
...}

Promoting general welfare could include social programs like health care.

promoting isnt [providing at the loss of another person,,,

thats called tyranny by theft,,,

Providing universal health care you are calling "tyranny by theft"?
How come the whole rest of the world does it?

one thing I think you and many others are missing is the constitutions doesnt allow this at a federal level,,, the states on the other hand are more than welcome to do it themselves,,,

Agreed.
The state level not only is more legal from a constitutional point of view, but also we have more say.

and its far easier to go to the state capital to complain than going to DC,,,

 

[Rigby5]

Marxists rely on the fact that a population is easily controlled if it is defenseless and all are equally miserable. You will have nothing.... but neither will your neighbors. Your healthcare will be considered substandard by voodoo witchdoctors in sub-saharan africa.... but it won't cost you a penny.

Pick a side.

Right wingers have no better solutions at lower cost; all they do is complain about left wing solutions.

Your fucking solutions have only made things worse for the middle classes

Not really.
I do not like ACA, but it has made a slight improvement for the middle class.
Premiums are more uniform, more easy to compare, no worries over pre-existing, and slightly lower.

Premiums are only lower when you get government money to help pay for them. They are unaffordable to people who don't qualify for getting Obamacare with the welfare provision

Not sure I believe that.
Insurance rates were increasing by about 15% annually, and were unaffordable before ACA.
I think ACA actually lowered them slightly, and the only increase came from those who did not buy insurance at all before, but now have to because of the penalty.

Well, since I operated my own businesses back then, I was writing the full check for my insurance and I know what it cost. Before Obamacare, I paid just under $400 a month for family high deductible coverage. In just 3-4 years under Obamacare it doubled, then they cancelled it completely and similar Obamacare policies were $1,000 a month and up because the taxpayers weren't paying any of my policy

All insurance doubled in about 4 years.
ACA had nothing to do with that.

Got it. Just coincidence insurance doubled in the first four years of Obamacare. Just pure chance. Sure it was. Surrreeee.......

Insurance doubled in the 4 years before ACA as well.