If one chooses not to buy heath insurance, they are not having it taken away. Stop lying, Progs

[ColonelAngus]

If I choose not to buy a pack of gum, did I lose that gum?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The lies are so transparent.

If the mandate is removed and people aren't punished for not buying healthcare, that is not "losing" their healthcare...it's choosing not to buy it.

Dems are such liars.

It's also odd for Democrats to punish the poor for not buying healthcare by making them pay a fine on their taxes.

If these poor people can't afford to buy an ID so they can vote, they sure as fuck can't buy health insurance

Are they not taking away the subsidies? Are they not reducing the Medicaid program?

 

[g5000]

The lies are so transparent.

If the mandate is removed and people aren't punished for not buying healthcare, that is not "losing" their healthcare...it's choosing not to buy it.

Dems are such liars.

It's also odd for Democrats to punish the poor for not buying healthcare by making them pay a fine on their taxes.

If these poor people can't afford to buy an ID so they can vote, they sure as fuck can't buy health insurance

The vast, vast, vast majority of people who would lose their health insurance under these Republican counterfeit repeals are people who would INVOLUNTARILY lose their health insurance, you fucking, fucking ,fucking retard.

 

[Camp]

If one chooses not to buy healthcare, they are not losing it.

Dems are flat out lying.

Healthcare and insurance are 2 different things. No one is turned away from getting healthcare, regardless of their health insurance.

Dems lie all day, every day. The truth is their enemy.

Fewer people are turned away from receiving healthcare since Obamacare, but even today people are being turned away.

It's simply not true.

People are not turned away from the ER to die from life threatening injuries or disease.

ER treatment is tempory and meant to stabilize an illness or injury. Patients are discharged with instructions to seek further attention. Even when hospitalization is required, it is only temporary treatment. So, yes, a person having a heart attack will get life-saving treatment at the ER and may spend days hospitalized and undergoing diagnostic tests, but once the patient is stabilized they will be released and it is up to them to find further and continued treatment.

 

[alang1216]

If I choose not to buy a pack of gum, did I lose that gum?

If that gum costs $1 and you have a $1 you can choose. If the cost of that gum goes up to $5 and you have a $1 you can NOT choose.

 

[g5000]

Here's my problem with the individual mandate.

The liberals have created a vortex of irony which is going to bankrupt the United States. They call a person who can afford health insurance who chooses not to buy insurance a "freeloader".

The liberals want these "freeloaders" to not only be forced to buy insurance, they want these "freeloaders" to pay EXTRA for health insurance so the government can take that extra money and use it to subsidize high school dropouts.

One third of the "involuntarily uninsured" are people who made a series of bad decisions, and the liberals want the rest of us to carry them on our backs for the rest of their lives.

And they call the people who don't want to carry high school dropouts on their backs "freeloaders"!!!!

It astonishes me that the brains of these liberals don't explode from cognitive dissonance. This shit is right out of Ayn Rand.

 

[alang1216]

People are not turned away from the ER to die from life threatening injuries or disease.

Can someone explain to me why putting a mandate on me to pay for someone's care is OK but putting a mandate on that someone to pay for their own care is not?

 

[alang1216]

One third of the "involuntarily uninsured" are people who made a series of bad decisions, and the liberals want the rest of us to carry them on our backs for the rest of their lives.

Assuming this is true, what you say to the children of these bad decision makers? Tough luck, the sins of the father are visited on the son?

 

[g5000]

Here is my problem with the employer mandate.

Employer sponsored health insurance drives up the cost of health care. Everyone knows this. Or at least everyone who knows anything about our health care system knows this.

So why would Democrats, who claim they are trying to cut health care costs, more deeply embed employer sponsored health insurance by mandating every employer with more than 30 full time employees provide health insurance?

The reason is that Democrats were not really trying to save money. They were trying to get labor union votes.

ObamaCare was a bait-and-switch con.

Another big problem with employer sponsored health care is the personal tax exemption. An employer funds around $13,000 of the average employee's health insurance.

That $13,000 is untaxed income for the employee.

That is the single largest individual tax expenditure in the tax code. It adds up to $250 billion in lost revenues.

That lost revenue is made up for by raising the tax rates on EVERY taxpayer.

For these reasons, employer sponsored health insurance needs to be DIScouraged, not more deeply embedded!

 

[g5000]

One third of the "involuntarily uninsured" are people who made a series of bad decisions, and the liberals want the rest of us to carry them on our backs for the rest of their lives.

Assuming this is true, what you say to the children of these bad decision makers? Tough luck, the sins of the father are visited on the son?

You don't have to assume. It IS true.

Employment Policies Institute | Who are the Uninsured? An Analysis of America’s Uninsured Population, Their Characteristics and Their Health

For example, roughly one-third of the involuntarily uninsured are high school dropouts, compared to approximately 7 percent of the privately insured population.

What do you say to the sons of the people who have to give up their income to carry others? Tough luck, the sins of strangers are visited on your children?

 

[ColonelAngus]

I chose NOT to buy a Playstation this week....my PLAYSTATION WAS TAKEN AWAY FROM ME!!!

 

[alang1216]

Here is my problem with the employer mandate.

Employer sponsored health insurance drives up the cost of health care. Everyone knows this. Or at least everyone who knows anything about our health care system knows this.

So why would Democrats, who claim they are trying to cut health care costs, more deeply embed employer sponsored health insurance by mandating every employer with more than 30 full time employees provide health insurance?

The reason is that Democrats were not really trying to save money. They were trying to get labor union votes.

ObamaCare was a bait-and-switch con.

Another big problem with employer sponsored health care is the personal tax exemption. An employer funds around $13,000 of the average employee's health insurance.

That $13,000 is untaxed income for the employee.

That is the single largest individual tax expenditure in the tax code. It adds up to $250 billion in lost revenues.

That lost revenue is made up for by raising the tax rates on EVERY taxpayer.

For these reasons, employer sponsored health insurance needs to be DIScouraged, not more deeply embedded!

I was addressing the individual mandate. I agree, there should be no employer mandate, it is a terrible way to fund health care.

 

[alang1216]

One third of the "involuntarily uninsured" are people who made a series of bad decisions, and the liberals want the rest of us to carry them on our backs for the rest of their lives.

Assuming this is true, what you say to the children of these bad decision makers? Tough luck, the sins of the father are visited on the son?

You don't have to assume. It IS true.

Employment Policies Institute | Who are the Uninsured? An Analysis of America’s Uninsured Population, Their Characteristics and Their Health

For example, roughly one-third of the involuntarily uninsured are high school dropouts, compared to approximately 7 percent of the privately insured population.

What do you say to the sons of the people who have to give up their income to carry others? Tough luck, the sins of strangers are visited on your children?

There is no cognitive dissonance here, only a difference of values. My values say I won't punish the innocent and the health of children is more important than money.

 

[g5000]

I chose NOT to buy a Playstation this week....my PLAYSTATION WAS TAKEN AWAY FROM ME!!!

The Medicaid expansion of ObamaCare provided health insurance to many millions of people who did not have health insurance.

Repealing Obamacare would take away that health insurance. Those millions of people would not be CHOOSING to give it up.

Dipshit.

 

[g5000]

One third of the "involuntarily uninsured" are people who made a series of bad decisions, and the liberals want the rest of us to carry them on our backs for the rest of their lives.

Assuming this is true, what you say to the children of these bad decision makers? Tough luck, the sins of the father are visited on the son?

You don't have to assume. It IS true.

Employment Policies Institute | Who are the Uninsured? An Analysis of America’s Uninsured Population, Their Characteristics and Their Health

For example, roughly one-third of the involuntarily uninsured are high school dropouts, compared to approximately 7 percent of the privately insured population.

What do you say to the sons of the people who have to give up their income to carry others? Tough luck, the sins of strangers are visited on your children?

There is no cognitive dissonance here, only a difference of values. My values say I won't punish the innocent and the health of children is more important than money.

You ARE punishing the innocent. You are taking money from innocent people and giving it to other people as a reward for their fuckups.

The reason this does not cause cognitive dissonance in you is because you don't have the intelligence required to experience it.

 

[g5000]

And now we will see the fascinating thought process of a liberal justifying theft from innocent people...

See the Reagan quote in my sig.

 

[alang1216]

You ARE punishing the innocent. You are taking money from innocent people and giving it to other people as a reward for their fuckups.

The reason this does not cause cognitive dissonance in you is because you don't have the intelligence required to experience it.

Yes, but the children of the fuckups are also innocent and my values say that health trumps money. The reason this does not cause cognitive dissonance in you is because you don't have the empathy required to experience it

 

[g5000]

You ARE punishing the innocent. You are taking money from innocent people and giving it to other people as a reward for their fuckups.

The reason this does not cause cognitive dissonance in you is because you don't have the intelligence required to experience it.

Yes, but the children of the fuckups are also innocent and my values say that health trumps money. The reason this does not cause cognitive dissonance in you is because you don't have the empathy required to experience it

Rewarding bad choices by stealing from others does not immanentize the eschaton.

A lesson liberals have utterly and repeatedly failed to learn.

 

[bendog]

You ARE punishing the innocent. You are taking money from innocent people and giving it to other people as a reward for their fuckups.

The reason this does not cause cognitive dissonance in you is because you don't have the intelligence required to experience it.

Yes, but the children of the fuckups are also innocent and my values say that health trumps money. The reason this does not cause cognitive dissonance in you is because you don't have the empathy required to experience it

Rewarding bad choices by stealing from others does not immanentize the eschaton.

A lesson liberals have utterly and repeatedly failed to learn.

I'd argue it is bipartisan. LOL

 

[alang1216]

You ARE punishing the innocent. You are taking money from innocent people and giving it to other people as a reward for their fuckups.

The reason this does not cause cognitive dissonance in you is because you don't have the intelligence required to experience it.

Yes, but the children of the fuckups are also innocent and my values say that health trumps money. The reason this does not cause cognitive dissonance in you is because you don't have the empathy required to experience it

Rewarding bad choices by stealing from others does not immanentize the eschaton.

A lesson liberals have utterly and repeatedly failed to learn.

I guess I learned my bad habits from Jesus. Foolish man wasted his precious time healing the sick and asking for us to give alms to the poor.

You value justice and that is fine but, regardless of how bad a parent is, how is justice served by not caring for a baby? Or should a healthy baby be viewed as a undeserved reward and a sick one a just punishment for a bad parent.