If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Daily Beast)   So who's going to get screwed if Obamacare is struck down? Ironically, it's Southerners (who vote GOP), insurance companies (who support the GOP) and young people (who don't vote)   (thedailybeast.com) divider line 247
    More: Interesting, obamacare, Roberts Court, Scalia, supreme courts  
•       •       •

2332 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Jun 2012 at 4:52 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



247 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-27 02:39:08 PM  
i would have thought big insurance would've supported dems, but this is not the case.
 
2012-06-27 02:41:25 PM  
SOCIALIZM!!111ELEVENTY
 
2012-06-27 02:51:50 PM  
got it. we should care more about insurance companies than we should the constitutionality of the law.
 
2012-06-27 02:52:18 PM  
It would be kind of amusing if the mandate was struck down and the rest stood.
 
2012-06-27 02:52:33 PM  
got it. we should care more about insurance companies than about the constitutionality of the law

ftfm
 
2012-06-27 02:52:36 PM  
And people like me

/a lot of people like me
//well... sorta like me, anyway
 
2012-06-27 02:53:53 PM  
People will pre-existing conditions will go back to being screwed over.
Insurance companies will once again be able to drop people for costing them too much money.

But hey, Obama will be sad, so it will all be worth it.
 
2012-06-27 02:54:31 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: got it. we should care more about insurance companies than we should the constitutionality of the law.


Scalia sure as hell does! But we'll soon see if he'll cut off his nose to spite his face.
 
2012-06-27 02:55:10 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: It would be kind of amusing if the mandate was struck down and the rest stood.


insurance companies would be sooooo farked.

people don't understand that without a single-payer system, a mandate is imperative to offset the additional cost insurance companies will incur by being required to cover preexisting conditions.
 
2012-06-27 02:55:32 PM  

Lando Lincoln: People will pre-existing conditions will go back to being screwed over.
Insurance companies will once again be able to drop people for costing them too much money.

But hey, Obama will be sad, so it will all be worth it.


Those parts should pass constitutional muster. It's the mandate that's the most contentious provision.
 
2012-06-27 02:58:11 PM  
Serious question (and I know Fark ain't the place to ask, but...) - if the individual mandate is struck down, will this bring a public option back into play?
 
2012-06-27 03:00:20 PM  
I really would like a medicare system for everyone. My boss pays 11500 a year for my ins. I pay an additional 3500. If we took all that, and an additional 2k from my pocket, paid it in tax, and everyone paid whatever they pay for their ins, we'd easily be able to cover everyone in the country. Easily. one system, one payer, everyone in, no one out.
 
2012-06-27 03:00:37 PM  
The mandate is necessary if pre-existing conditions denials are eliminated. There are plenty of scumbags in the country who will not get insurance until they get really sick.

I am still amazed we are even discussing this. Healthcare shouldn't even be an issue. Medicine should not be a for-profit industry. we are talking about human lives and the only thing that seems to matter to some people is the farking bottom line.

Single payer. Now.
 
2012-06-27 03:00:58 PM  
The funny thing is that anyone with even a modicum of understanding of the Republican position on economics and government understands why it was conservatives who proposed the individual mandate, and why it makes complete sense from a Republican point of view.

It's really Democrats who shouldn't like it. But these days, it's all about which party PASSED the bill than intellectual honesty.
 
2012-06-27 03:05:56 PM  

vygramul: It's really Democrats who shouldn't like it. But these days, it's all about which party PASSED the bill than intellectual honesty.


The fact that the Gov. Romney's signature piece of legislation which he said should be applied to the nation one of the direct inspirations for the bill says that.
 
2012-06-27 03:08:12 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: The mandate is necessary if pre-existing conditions denials are eliminated. There are plenty of scumbags in the country who will not get insurance until they get really sick.

I am still amazed we are even discussing this. Healthcare shouldn't even be an issue. Medicine should not be a for-profit industry. we are talking about human lives and the only thing that seems to matter to some people is the farking bottom line.

Single payer. Now.


i54.tinypic.com
 
2012-06-27 03:08:33 PM  

vygramul: The funny thing is that anyone with even a modicum of understanding of the Republican position on economics and government understands why it was conservatives who proposed the individual mandate, and why it makes complete sense from a Republican point of view.

It's really Democrats who shouldn't like it. But these days, it's all about which party PASSED the bill than intellectual honesty.


I understand that it was a crappy way to keep the insurance companies in the money loop. But nearly the entire Democratic party shied away from even bringing up the single-payer topic, so this is the best that we could get.
 
2012-06-27 03:14:18 PM  

pisceandreamer: Serious question (and I know Fark ain't the place to ask, but...) - if the individual mandate is struck down, will this bring a public option back into play?


It has to, as it's the only option left. Look at it this way:

If SCOTUS strikes it all down tomorrow, then the Republican answer to HCR will have been buried. The onus will be on the Dems to provide their plan to fix a broken healthcare system, and we know their response is either single-payer or public option.
 
2012-06-27 03:14:50 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: It would be kind of amusing if the mandate was struck down and the rest stood.


Funny until insurance companies are banned from operating in all 50 states for failing to meet each state's reserve/profit requirements. Then nobody would have insurance! So fun! So cool! Can't wait!

Insurance companies for the most part stayed out of the fight. They were in a lose/lose situation and went with the "everybody must purchase your product by law" side and in hopes of making a buck. That would be the Democrat side.
 
2012-06-27 03:18:49 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: I am still amazed we are even discussing this. Healthcare shouldn't even be an issue. Medicine should not be a for-profit industry. we are talking about human lives and the only thing that seems to matter to some people is the farking bottom line.

Single payer. Now.


And there you have it. A perfect example of a person that doesn't know anything about the failures of communism around the globe. He's blocked out all factual information, all history, all facts regarding human nature, and just relies on his "But what about the children!?!" type feelings. This is one of the reasons why it is dangerous to the country for idiot libs to be in power.
 
2012-06-27 03:22:11 PM  

MeinRS6: AdolfOliverPanties: I am still amazed we are even discussing this. Healthcare shouldn't even be an issue. Medicine should not be a for-profit industry. we are talking about human lives and the only thing that seems to matter to some people is the farking bottom line.

Single payer. Now.

And there you have it. A perfect example of a person that doesn't know anything about the failures of communism around the globe. He's blocked out all factual information, all history, all facts regarding human nature, and just relies on his "But what about the children!?!" type feelings. This is one of the reasons why it is dangerous to the country for idiot libs to be in power.


[notsureifserious.jpg]
 
2012-06-27 03:22:39 PM  

bradkanus: Marcus Aurelius: It would be kind of amusing if the mandate was struck down and the rest stood.

Funny until insurance companies are banned from operating in all 50 states for failing to meet each state's reserve/profit requirements. Then nobody would have insurance! So fun! So cool! Can't wait!

Insurance companies for the most part stayed out of the fight. They were in a lose/lose situation and went with the "everybody must purchase your product by law" side and in hopes of making a buck. That would be the Democrat side.


You're right, they'd never raise their rates to meet the shortfall.
 
2012-06-27 03:22:59 PM  

MeinRS6: AdolfOliverPanties: I am still amazed we are even discussing this. Healthcare shouldn't even be an issue. Medicine should not be a for-profit industry. we are talking about human lives and the only thing that seems to matter to some people is the farking bottom line.

Single payer. Now.

And there you have it. A perfect example of a person that doesn't know anything about the failures of communism around the globe. He's blocked out all factual information, all history, all facts regarding human nature, and just relies on his "But what about the children!?!" type feelings. This is one of the reasons why it is dangerous to the country for idiot libs to be in power.


Wow, I have really not been paying attention! I never realized that communism had taken control of Canada, the entirety of Europe and most of Asia! And the entire time, I thought Reagan won the war against the commies!
 
2012-06-27 03:23:33 PM  

MeinRS6: AdolfOliverPanties: I am still amazed we are even discussing this. Healthcare shouldn't even be an issue. Medicine should not be a for-profit industry. we are talking about human lives and the only thing that seems to matter to some people is the farking bottom line.

Single payer. Now.

And there you have it. A perfect example of a person that doesn't know anything about the failures of communism around the globe. He's blocked out all factual information, all history, all facts regarding human nature, and just relies on his "But what about the children!?!" type feelings. This is one of the reasons why it is dangerous to the country for idiot libs to be in power.


You do know what single payer means, yes?

[notsureifserious.jpg]
 
2012-06-27 03:24:43 PM  
I'll sit over here in the corner.
 
2012-06-27 03:26:04 PM  
I hope the SCOTUS does strike the mandate down. It'd be hilarious to see insurance companies pouring billions into Democrat races just to try and protect their own existence. If Republican policies led to bankruptcy in the name of freedom, the good businessman knows that reduced profit at continued existence is a far superior option.
 
2012-06-27 03:31:26 PM  

MeinRS6: AdolfOliverPanties: I am still amazed we are even discussing this. Healthcare shouldn't even be an issue. Medicine should not be a for-profit industry. we are talking about human lives and the only thing that seems to matter to some people is the farking bottom line.

Single payer. Now.

And there you have it. A perfect example of a person that doesn't know anything about the failures of communism around the globe. He's blocked out all factual information, all history, all facts regarding human nature, and just relies on his "But what about the children!?!" type feelings. This is one of the reasons why it is dangerous to the country for idiot libs to be in power.


I was going to reply to this point by point, refuting all of your hypotheses and illuminating for all to see your deep level of misunderstanding not only my post, but things in general, but then I remembered something.

There's no need.

Everyone on this board already knows what an ignorant misguided dickhole you are.
 
2012-06-27 03:32:38 PM  
And independent contractors who already have to buy their own health insurance.
Or people would become independent contractors if not for lack of health benefits.
 
2012-06-27 03:36:18 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: bradkanus: Marcus Aurelius: It would be kind of amusing if the mandate was struck down and the rest stood.

Funny until insurance companies are banned from operating in all 50 states for failing to meet each state's reserve/profit requirements. Then nobody would have insurance! So fun! So cool! Can't wait!

Insurance companies for the most part stayed out of the fight. They were in a lose/lose situation and went with the "everybody must purchase your product by law" side and in hopes of making a buck. That would be the Democrat side.

You're right, they'd never raise their rates to meet the shortfall.


Insurance companies can't raise rates without going through the "rate review" process in their state. They literally have to go before a state committee and prove why they need to increase premiums. Often their excuse is that if they don't increase premiums, they'll fall below the states reserve threshold. You see, all 50 states require that insurance companies make a profit - enough of one to cover X amount of subscribers if they all got sick at one time. So, no they can't just raise their rates whenever they feel like it.

Remember - in the food chain for health care doctors, hospitals, drug companies, medical device companies and other players can raise their prices anytime they see fit. Only the health insurers have to ask for permission. This means that insurance companies eat it until they can get a rate review. Often the rate increases are drastic because they have to work in the possibilities of the non-regulated factors raising rates.

Do you know why doctors and hospitals raise rates on insurers? Because medicare and medicaid don't pay enough!

YOu can blame insurers all you want, but they don't set the initial cost of health care - your doctor and his other partners in crime do.
 
2012-06-27 03:37:14 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: got it. we should care more about insurance companies than about the constitutionality of the law

ftfm


Yup. The individual mandate sucks ass. However, there's no way of preventing people from gaming the system without it. That's why if/when SCOTUS strikes down the mandate, a lot of the guts of Obamacare are going to be worthless. The law will have no teeth.
 
2012-06-27 03:39:05 PM  

FlashHarry: Marcus Aurelius: It would be kind of amusing if the mandate was struck down and the rest stood.

insurance companies would be sooooo farked.

people don't understand that without a single-payer system, a mandate is imperative to offset the additional cost insurance companies will incur by being required to cover preexisting conditions.


...

That is true. The only way the insurance companies could handle people "gaming the system" that way is to raise rates for EVERYBODY ELSE.

That would suck.
 
2012-06-27 03:39:40 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: It would be kind of amusing if the mandate was struck down and the rest stood.


I think the law will stand as it is.
 
2012-06-27 03:40:09 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: pisceandreamer: Serious question (and I know Fark ain't the place to ask, but...) - if the individual mandate is struck down, will this bring a public option back into play?

It has to, as it's the only option left. Look at it this way:

If SCOTUS strikes it all down tomorrow, then the Republican answer to HCR will have been buried. The onus will be on the Dems to provide their plan to fix a broken healthcare system, and we know their response is either single-payer or public option.


Or we could just let the health care system stay the way it is so eventually only the rich can get good (if any) health care.

BRILLIANT!
 
2012-06-27 03:42:03 PM  

MeinRS6: And there you have it. A perfect example of a person that doesn't know anything about the failures of communism around the globe. He's blocked out all factual information, all history, all facts regarding human nature, and just relies on his "But what about the children!?!" type feelings. This is one of the reasons why it is dangerous to the country for idiot libs to be in power.


The fact that EVERY first world country has nationalized health care, and the US is the ONLY country that doesn't, strikes you as perfectly legitimate and clearly the US has the (only) right idea about how to handle health care costs?
 
2012-06-27 03:42:07 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: MeinRS6: AdolfOliverPanties: I am still amazed we are even discussing this. Healthcare shouldn't even be an issue. Medicine should not be a for-profit industry. we are talking about human lives and the only thing that seems to matter to some people is the farking bottom line.

Single payer. Now.

And there you have it. A perfect example of a person that doesn't know anything about the failures of communism around the globe. He's blocked out all factual information, all history, all facts regarding human nature, and just relies on his "But what about the children!?!" type feelings. This is one of the reasons why it is dangerous to the country for idiot libs to be in power.

Wow, I have really not been paying attention! I never realized that communism had taken control of Canada, the entirety of Europe and most of Asia! And the entire time, I thought Reagan won the war against the commies!


Can't trust Republicans to do *anything* right. So vote Republican.
 
2012-06-27 03:48:00 PM  

xanadian: However, there's no way of preventing people from gaming the system without it. That's why if/when SCOTUS strikes down the mandate, a lot of the guts of Obamacare are going to be worthless. The law will have no teeth.


IMHO, if the mandate goes, the whole law will probably go as well.
//looks for a post from an old thread

I found some sites (liberal [new window], mostly) quoting the decision in Buckley vs Valeo (as referenced in Alaska Airlines, Inc. v. Brock) saying
Unless it is evident that the Legislature would not have enacted those provisions which are within its power, independently of that which is not, the invalid part may be dropped if what is left is fully operative as a law.
If the mandate is tossed, I'd say what is left would certainly be fully operative as a law. The question is if it's "evident that the Legislature would not have enacted those provisions which are within its power, independently of that which is not".

If it's ruled that the mandate is not in congress's power, but everything else is, the question seems to be "would the law have passed if the mandate hadn't been included".
I think there's a pretty good case to be made that it wouldn't have (wouldn't have even gotten out of committee, most likely), so if you found that key piece unconstitutional, then the rest would be rolled back as well.

IF, that is, if the mandate/tax/penalty is found to be outside the powers of Congress.

//but who knows with this partisan, political court
 
2012-06-27 03:50:10 PM  

tallguywithglasseson: xanadian: However, there's no way of preventing people from gaming the system without it. That's why if/when SCOTUS strikes down the mandate, a lot of the guts of Obamacare are going to be worthless. The law will have no teeth.

IMHO, if the mandate goes, the whole law will probably go as well.
//looks for a post from an old thread

I found some sites (liberal [new window], mostly) quoting the decision in Buckley vs Valeo (as referenced in Alaska Airlines, Inc. v. Brock) sayingUnless it is evident that the Legislature would not have enacted those provisions which are within its power, independently of that which is not, the invalid part may be dropped if what is left is fully operative as a law.If the mandate is tossed, I'd say what is left would certainly be fully operative as a law. The question is if it's "evident that the Legislature would not have enacted those provisions which are within its power, independently of that which is not".

If it's ruled that the mandate is not in congress's power, but everything else is, the question seems to be "would the law have passed if the mandate hadn't been included".
I think there's a pretty good case to be made that it wouldn't have (wouldn't have even gotten out of committee, most likely), so if you found that key piece unconstitutional, then the rest would be rolled back as well.

IF, that is, if the mandate/tax/penalty is found to be outside the powers of Congress.

//but who knows with this partisan, political court


That would allow the justices to be mind-readers, which they are not.

Guess we'll see tomorrow.
 
2012-06-27 03:55:35 PM  

xanadian: That would allow the justices to be mind-readers, which they are not.


Or they would just have to look at all of the information available, and make a judgment.

You know, like a judge.
 
2012-06-27 03:59:01 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: MeinRS6: AdolfOliverPanties: I am still amazed we are even discussing this. Healthcare shouldn't even be an issue. Medicine should not be a for-profit industry. we are talking about human lives and the only thing that seems to matter to some people is the farking bottom line.

Single payer. Now.

And there you have it. A perfect example of a person that doesn't know anything about the failures of communism around the globe. He's blocked out all factual information, all history, all facts regarding human nature, and just relies on his "But what about the children!?!" type feelings. This is one of the reasons why it is dangerous to the country for idiot libs to be in power.

I was going to reply to this point by point, refuting all of your hypotheses and illuminating for all to see your deep level of misunderstanding not only my post, but things in general, but then I remembered something.

There's no need.

Everyone on this board already knows what an ignorant misguided dickhole you are.


That's such a communist thing to say
 
2012-06-27 04:06:55 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: MeinRS6: AdolfOliverPanties: I am still amazed we are even discussing this. Healthcare shouldn't even be an issue. Medicine should not be a for-profit industry. we are talking about human lives and the only thing that seems to matter to some people is the farking bottom line.

Single payer. Now.

And there you have it. A perfect example of a person that doesn't know anything about the failures of communism around the globe. He's blocked out all factual information, all history, all facts regarding human nature, and just relies on his "But what about the children!?!" type feelings. This is one of the reasons why it is dangerous to the country for idiot libs to be in power.

I was going to reply to this point by point, refuting all of your hypotheses and illuminating for all to see your deep level of misunderstanding not only my post, but things in general, but then I remembered something.

There's no need.

Everyone on this board already knows what an ignorant misguided dickhole you are.


That's unfair.

He's an emotionally stunted alt who needs to be a fascist on the interwebs because his dad always thought he was kind of a pussy.
 
2012-06-27 04:07:48 PM  

tallguywithglasseson: xanadian: That would allow the justices to be mind-readers, which they are not.

Or they would just have to look at all of the information available, and make a judgment.

You know, like a judge.


What time do the orders from Koch and Norquist come in? How are the underlings supposed to make decisions without input from management?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-06-27 04:08:56 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: got it. we should care more about insurance companies than about the constitutionality of the law

ftfm


The law isn't unconstitutional. The Commerce Clause is settled law, just like Marbury v. Madison. That's why most legal scholars thought PPACA would be upheld until recently.
 
2012-06-27 04:09:39 PM  

unlikely: What time do the orders from Koch and Norquist come in? How are the underlings supposed to make decisions without input from management?


Hunting trips?
 
2012-06-27 04:13:44 PM  

MeinRS6:

And there you have it. A perfect example of a person that doesn't know anything about the failures of communism around the globe.


You don't know what the word "communism" means. You seem to think it's a bad word to call things that you think you don't like.

In other words whether or not something is "communist" has no connection to something that you call communist.
 
2012-06-27 04:18:52 PM  

vpb: The Commerce Clause is settled law


not to a hyper-partisan justice like scalia or thomas
 
2012-06-27 04:30:03 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: MeinRS6: AdolfOliverPanties: I am still amazed we are even discussing this. Healthcare shouldn't even be an issue. Medicine should not be a for-profit industry. we are talking about human lives and the only thing that seems to matter to some people is the farking bottom line.

Single payer. Now.

And there you have it. A perfect example of a person that doesn't know anything about the failures of communism around the globe. He's blocked out all factual information, all history, all facts regarding human nature, and just relies on his "But what about the children!?!" type feelings. This is one of the reasons why it is dangerous to the country for idiot libs to be in power.

I was going to reply to this point by point, refuting all of your hypotheses and illuminating for all to see your deep level of misunderstanding not only my post, but things in general, but then I remembered something.

There's no need.

Everyone on this board already knows what an ignorant misguided dickhole you are.


Such nasty name-calling. tsk tsk Those libby emotions really do rule your life. You should try facts and logic for a change.

The reason that you cannot respond in a meaningful way is because you know I'm right.

When something becomes not for profit, does it then become more or less innovative? There are many other questions I could ask along these lines, but that's as good as any to start.

Ask yourself - If you had a serious medical problem and you would benefit from the newest treatments with the best trained doctors, would you seek treatment in a not for profit communist country? You can go anywhere you want - do you pick a current or even former communist state?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-06-27 04:31:35 PM  
Liberals have never been able to understand why Southerners (and other, generally rural poor whites) vote against their own economic interests. If you understand Maslow's hierarchy then you can see how being looked down upon by "liberal elites" might be a more urgent problem to them than "lack of prejudice" and "acceptance of facts" and "problem solving".

upload.wikimedia.org

Conservatives have figured that out and exploit it effectively.
 
2012-06-27 04:34:07 PM  

MeinRS6:
Such nasty name-calling. tsk tsk


What goes around comes around.

Speaking of coming around. The phrase "tsk tsk" seems a little effeminate, even for a totally "not gay" stud like yourself.

Are you sure that you don't come here to meet guys?
 
2012-06-27 04:35:18 PM  

MeinRS6: The reason that you cannot respond in a meaningful way is because you know I'm right.


No. I don't need to because several posters have already done that work for me. You don't have the slightest farking clue what you are talking about, what communism is and how socialized healthcare works. You prove that with each subsequent post.

Rather than waste my time refudiating* you, I'll let the others, and there are many of them, do it. And they have.

Therefore, you = dickhole.


*intentional
 
2012-06-27 04:35:26 PM  

vpb: being looked down upon by "liberal elites" might be a more urgent problem to them


You are failing to recognize the fact that the agenda of "liberal elites" is bad for the country. So that's why not everyone responds to them in a positive manner. No graph required for that one.
 
Displayed 50 of 247 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report