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.

(US Supreme Court) NewsFlash Supreme Court rules that Obamacare is constitutional. The bland mask that is Mitt Romney's face twitches with something called "emotion"   (supremecourt.gov) divider line 3382
    More: NewsFlash, obamacare, supreme courts, Mitt Romney, supreme court ruling  
•       •       •

14918 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Jun 2012 at 10:27 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

3382 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | » | Last
 
2012-06-28 08:26:54 PM  

intelligent comment below: bhcompy: There is no right to maintain your life. If I lose my job and cannot achieve the same level of income there is no right that I should be able to keep my Corvette, my McMansion, and eat prime steaks even though I can't afford to maintain it, because that would be maintaining. Right to life is the right to forge your own destiny, not a right to free healthcare.


There is no logic in this. You are a horrible hateful jealous person and you should feel bad.


People like him don't understand that people like me aren't asking for free health care, we just want to be able to purchase a health care plan.
 
2012-06-28 08:27:24 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: And no matter how many times you call it that, it's still not a tax.


Ok this is a serious post now, but didn't SCOTUS just rule that the only way the individual mandate can be enforced is as a tax? Or am I missing something here..

/been a long day at work
//be gentle
 
2012-06-28 08:27:27 PM  

Corvus: armoredbulldozer: Paging Mr. Harrelson.....

Kagan should have recused herself. The racist Sotomayor sucks Donkey cock!

Should Clarence Thomas recused himself? You know they guy who's wife took 1.5 MILLION DOLLARS FROM ANTI-ACA GROUPS IN LOBBYING MONEY?


Quite possibly, good point!
 
2012-06-28 08:28:15 PM  
Good to know the government can tax things your're NOT doing!

Note to teenage girls getting abortions: Your abortions will be kept secret from your parents, as long as you keep up the monthly abortion secrecy tax...
 
2012-06-28 08:28:45 PM  

Sum Dum Gai: mrshowrules: It isn't that complicated. If use the free market to price something with an inelastic demand it won't work. If I had a pill that would save your life, what would you pay me for it? Free market works well for things that have elastic demand. Think of police and fire services as an example of something that makes more sense to use a socialized model, extend that to emergency care and you will start to see why every other industrialized country in the world has some type of universal care model.

I would love to see universal health care. Maybe sometime in my lifetime I will. Certainly not today.

The PPACA is better than the old status quo by a lot. It won't solve every problem, but it will help a lot of people. I think this also makes it more likely to someday see universal health care in this nation.


You could have it tomorrow. You already have Medicare which is single-payer. You have it for the sickest and oldest segment of the population. Extend the risk pool to healthier and healthier people and it will become cheaper and cheaper. Anthony Weiner proposed this and if he wasnt such a perv he might have gotten somewhere with it.
 
2012-06-28 08:29:47 PM  

TsukasaK: Keizer_Ghidorah: And no matter how many times you call it that, it's still not a tax.

Ok this is a serious post now, but didn't SCOTUS just rule that the only way the individual mandate can be enforced is as a tax? Or am I missing something here..

/been a long day at work
//be gentle


yes
justice roberts
it is a tax
done and over
 
2012-06-28 08:29:50 PM  

publikenemy: My wife works in healthcare. Take it for what it is, but many older docs told her they were out if it goes through. Retiring early and what not. They do not want to deal with it...I'm not a big fan of young docs myself. The other day this douchebag doctor was texting while I was talking to him...I wanted to shove the phone down his throat..

Thanx Barry



A doctor ran over my friends cat

Thanx Barry
 
2012-06-28 08:30:40 PM  

NateGrey: armoredbulldozer: Paging Mr. Harrelson.....

Kagan should have recused herself. The racist Sotomayor sucks Donkey cock!

Awesome! Can I have a second helping of Republican tears?


Sure, go find a Republican and help yourself!
 
2012-06-28 08:31:13 PM  
The last time Democrats gloated this hard after a health care victory, they lost 60 House seats.
 
2012-06-28 08:31:17 PM  
Well we can only hope Mitt gets elected and does better than this
 
2012-06-28 08:32:02 PM  

Krymson Tyde: NateGrey: Teabaggers want to protest but they are all on Disability. NO JOKE

I was going to comment to the freepers re: their pants on head comments, but when I tried o got this response
[i232.photobucket.com image 300x450]
The funny thing is the one time I did post there it was a nonassholish challenging of ideas.
Oh well, I guess I should take it as a badge of honor.


Yeah, they sure are a bunch of all-American, rugged, thick skinned types over there.
 
2012-06-28 08:33:15 PM  
There sure are a lot of unemployed people in here aren't there?
 
2012-06-28 08:33:24 PM  
Still no word on the gerdunza issue?
 
2012-06-28 08:34:28 PM  

mrshowrules: You could have it tomorrow. You already have Medicare which is single-payer. You have it for the sickest and oldest segment of the population. Extend the risk pool to healthier and healthier people and it will become cheaper and cheaper. Anthony Weiner proposed this and if he wasnt such a perv he might have gotten somewhere with it.


I couldn't have it tomorrow, because there's not a Republican in Congress who would ever consider voting for that. Even the conservative Democrats wouldn't be on board. You have to push laws through the Congress that you have, not the Congress that you wish you had.
 
2012-06-28 08:35:44 PM  

mrshowrules: Sum Dum Gai: mrshowrules: It isn't that complicated. If use the free market to price something with an inelastic demand it won't work. If I had a pill that would save your life, what would you pay me for it? Free market works well for things that have elastic demand. Think of police and fire services as an example of something that makes more sense to use a socialized model, extend that to emergency care and you will start to see why every other industrialized country in the world has some type of universal care model.

I would love to see universal health care. Maybe sometime in my lifetime I will. Certainly not today.

The PPACA is better than the old status quo by a lot. It won't solve every problem, but it will help a lot of people. I think this also makes it more likely to someday see universal health care in this nation.

You could have it tomorrow. You already have Medicare which is single-payer. You have it for the sickest and oldest segment of the population. Extend the risk pool to healthier and healthier people and it will become cheaper and cheaper. Anthony Weiner proposed this and if he wasnt such a perv he might have gotten somewhere with it.


You just like talking about wieners.
 
2012-06-28 08:36:59 PM  
Two screen captures that basically summarize the awesomeness of today`s rulings

i116.photobucket.com

i116.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-28 08:37:30 PM  

silgryphon: Well we can only hope Mitt gets elected and does better than this


"better"
We have been WAITING to hear what he is going to replace obamacare with.
We have been WAITING to hear how he is going to fix immigration.

I guess we will find out once the focus groups are done deciding for him.
 
2012-06-28 08:37:56 PM  

Purdue_Pete: I am an independent, Libertarian-leaning thinker and it's beyond obvious, it needs to be single-payer or nothing at all. It's basic common sense.



Except nothing at all has America paying the most for health care and covers the least amount of people giving low quality care.

Obamacare is a middle ground to appeal to both parties

That's how a Democracy works
 
2012-06-28 08:38:27 PM  

mr lawson: intelligent comment below: Why lower costs for skyrocketing health care costs

Question: Why do you think health care cost have been skyrocketing? (They have, but WHY?)


Shoot. That's an easy one. Because MRIs are way more expensive than ether and body bags. Heart bypass surgery is way more expensive than a shot of Dr. Butthurt's Magical Health Serum.
 
2012-06-28 08:38:45 PM  

Waldo Pepper: so what if you are healthy and simply pay for whatever doctor visits you need at the time you are penalized by the government for not buy a product/service?


Then you are effectively making the rest of us subsidize your insurance. Chances are very small that you can afford to fix everything that might, and eventually will, go wrong with your body.
 
2012-06-28 08:39:44 PM  

relcec: it really shouldn't. the mortgage interest deduction, child tax credit, and the tax credit for not growing food are all the height of ridiculousness. the last one is the best; we are going to give you a tax break for buying a farm, and then not growing food on it. all you other people need buy farms and not grow food on it.
but as we all know, ridiculous =! unconsitutional.



Paying to not grow food is designed to keep prices higher so farms can make good profits. All advanced nations protect their farming industries.
 
2012-06-28 08:40:19 PM  

namatad: silgryphon: Well we can only hope Mitt gets elected and does better than this

"better"
We have been WAITING to hear what he is going to replace obamacare with.
We have been WAITING to hear how he is going to fix immigration.

I guess we will find out once the focus groups are done deciding for him.


He'll just do the opposite of whatever Obama did, once they tell him what that was. For example:
"This past weekend, Mitt Romney vowed that he would look at what President Obama has done regarding Israel and "do the opposite.""
 
2012-06-28 08:40:43 PM  

WhyteRaven74: jigger: Eh, someone brought up federal murder laws and I was just wondering if anyone had a constitutional justification for those laws that weren't covered by the above.

Murder on federal lands, where the federal government holds sole jurisdiction, murder involving interstate abduction where the feds hold jurisdiction as the crime involves more than one state, murder of federal employees and officials.


Right. Those seem to fit the above conditions. Not sure about interstate abduction. I think things like that are handled by "A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime."
 
2012-06-28 08:40:53 PM  

Sum Dum Gai: mrshowrules: You could have it tomorrow. You already have Medicare which is single-payer. You have it for the sickest and oldest segment of the population. Extend the risk pool to healthier and healthier people and it will become cheaper and cheaper. Anthony Weiner proposed this and if he wasnt such a perv he might have gotten somewhere with it.

I couldn't have it tomorrow, because there's not a Republican in Congress who would ever consider voting for that. Even the conservative Democrats wouldn't be on board. You have to push laws through the Congress that you have, not the Congress that you wish you had.


Well there's that. My point I guess is that your only barrier is a political barrier. Break the back of the GOP, and you might actually get somewhere. Obama has allowed the country to take a huge leap. You are much closer to universal health care and single payer. One thing Conservatives have correct (I believe) is that it will do nothing to control premiums. You need single-payer, a public option or an expansion of Medicare to do that.
 
2012-06-28 08:41:09 PM  

armoredbulldozer: bwilson27: armoredbulldozer: Paging Mr. Harrelson.....

Kagan should have recused herself. The racist Sotomayor sucks Donkey cock!

Yeeees, let the hate flow....

You bet your ass SCOTUS farked America!


WHOOOOOO!!!!!!
 
2012-06-28 08:42:37 PM  

Infernalist: Ben Franklin would tell you to STFU and GTFO if you don't want to pay your fair share of taxes to the common good of the republic.

And then he would do something awesome, like invent bifocals.


Or bang my old lady.

Or maybe even invent bifocals while banging my old lady.
 
2012-06-28 08:43:55 PM  

TsukasaK: Keizer_Ghidorah: And no matter how many times you call it that, it's still not a tax.

Ok this is a serious post now, but didn't SCOTUS just rule that the only way the individual mandate can be enforced is as a tax? Or am I missing something here..

/been a long day at work
//be gentle


They made it a "kinda, sorta" thing, which keeps them safe from any fireworks caused by it. From what I've seen and what others here have explained, it's not necessarily a tax per se.
 
2012-06-28 08:44:10 PM  

jevanpe5: We're rich business owners anyway. We'll just keep paying for deadweight asses like yourself and take care of own in the meantime.. Thats the Republican Way...



Like the red states who rely on more federal taxes than they take in?

I bet you work in an industry heavily subsidized by government, that would be the ultimate irony

Probably went to public schools, then the military, then free college, then something like defense industry or farm, epic hypocrisy.
 
2012-06-28 08:44:24 PM  

Lorelle: intelligent comment below: bhcompy: There is no right to maintain your life. If I lose my job and cannot achieve the same level of income there is no right that I should be able to keep my Corvette, my McMansion, and eat prime steaks even though I can't afford to maintain it, because that would be maintaining. Right to life is the right to forge your own destiny, not a right to free healthcare.


There is no logic in this. You are a horrible hateful jealous person and you should feel bad.

People like him don't understand that people like me aren't asking for free health care, we just want to be able to purchase a health care plan.


You can, but it's expensive, because you're a huge liability. That's how insurance is supposed to work. Of course, paying cash is also an option and the rates are far cheaper than what the doctor bills insurance companies. This concept now is broken, but hopefully we realize how broken it is and move to single payer government run care sooner rather than later because it's a clusterfark now.

I'm sorry that you have a problem that causes you to be a huge insurance liability, but none of our founding documents claim that life is fair, just that, essentially, the government shouldn't get in the way of you living your life freely, and they weren't before this law was created.
 
2012-06-28 08:45:30 PM  

Lorelle: Antimatter: GBB: david_gaithersburg: Has anyone here ever opted to purchase the COBRA offered by their employer? Bwahahahaha! Its now THE LAW suckhars.

As a matter of fact, Yes, I have. Disney (WDW) offers some of the cheapest premiums of any employer that is not the Federal Government. I can't remember the exact amount, but damn, was it cheap!! Most of the time, when you are offered COBRA, you pay the full amount and then discover how much your employer has been kicking in for you. I can only assume that because of how many employees they have, and they are unionized, the premiums are so cheap that Disney (WDW) doesn't chip in at all.

A+++++ Will do again.

But, yes, I know what you are getting at; COBRA is an unaffordable option for someone that is no longer employed.

which is where the exchanges and such come in. Hopefully they have a cheap HSA plan in there somewhere to cover folks who don't have employer insurance, but don't get sick often enough to need a traditional health care plan.

This is what I'm hoping for (I currently don't have health insurance).

Before I was laid off, I paid $54 a month for a Blue Shield plan. Post-layoff, I got COBRA coverage (still Blue Shield) for $413 a month. Six months later, that was increased to $457 a month, my copays increased from $30 to $40 per visit, along with increases in prescription costs. At least mammograms and pap smears were still "free."

My COBRA coverage ended in February. I can't get affordable health care right now due to a pre-existing condition. It really sucks because I'm just about to knock over 50, and am entering that stage of life when having health care is EXTREMELY important. At least I can get low-cost "female services" at Planned Parenthood. I just hope that I don't have any costly medical emergencies between now and January, 2014.


COBRA is a farking rip off to the extreme. What would individual coverage have cost you? If you would have had continuous coverage with that you wouldn't have had to deal with the pre-existing condition problem. Or pay the ridiculous COBRA premiums.
 
2012-06-28 08:47:44 PM  

KarmicDisaster: namatad: silgryphon: Well we can only hope Mitt gets elected and does better than this

"better"
We have been WAITING to hear what he is going to replace obamacare with.
We have been WAITING to hear how he is going to fix immigration.

I guess we will find out once the focus groups are done deciding for him.

He'll just do the opposite of whatever Obama did, once they tell him what that was. For example:
"This past weekend, Mitt Romney vowed that he would look at what President Obama has done regarding Israel and "do the opposite.""


ROFL
 
2012-06-28 08:48:01 PM  
So now people have to pay for insurance. If you can't pay, you go to jail. That's wrong
 
2012-06-28 08:48:31 PM  

bhcompy: You can, but it's expensive, because you're a huge liability. That's how insurance is supposed to work. Of course, paying cash is also an option and the rates are far cheaper than what the doctor bills insurance companies. This concept now is broken, but hopefully we realize how broken it is and move to single payer government run care sooner rather than later because it's a clusterfark now.


The rates are far more expensive than what the insurance companies pay. Insurance companies bargain down the price a lot. Self-pay always pays the most, or none at all. (e.g. bankruptcy)

Insurers have a lot of power to dictate how much they will pay. Private citizens have none of that.
 
2012-06-28 08:49:48 PM  

silgryphon: So now people have to pay for insurance. If you can't pay, you go to jail. That's wrong


It is wrong, I'll give you that much.
 
2012-06-28 08:50:56 PM  

silgryphon: So now people have to pay for insurance. If you can't pay, you go to jail. That's wrong


If you can't pay, the government will buy insurance for you (using the rather generous subsidies also in the act.) If you won't pay for insurance, your tax bill will go up by a small amount.
 
2012-06-28 08:51:44 PM  

namatad: EvilIguana966: Follow my train of thought for a moment.

Our constitution never mentions healthcare as an industry that the government should control. It also states that every activity not specifically mentioned is reserved for the states or the people themselves to take care of.

your train is broken
therefore, each state is required to control: drugs, air travel, air waves, anything with electricity, pollution, trash, genetics, medicine, pretty much EVERYTHING

THIS is why the commerce clause gets used so much. The air waves cross state borders, therefore the feds MUST get involved, esp to deal with cities near each other but on opposite borders.

this idea that STATES should decide things at this point in time is such an outdated concept.
liquor laws? sure fine
prostitution? fine
drugs? see liquor
gambling? yup

but car safety standards?
OF COURSE the feds should set the standards
what about train track gauge?

/back to your regularly scheduled derp


Here's the problem I have with this: you consider states deciding things to be outdated, but there already is a process for changing what is the law of the land in that regards(Constitutional amendment). Use that rather than shiatting all over what is a fundamental rule of governance based on the document that sets forth those rules. If you want the federal government to do all these things, give them the explicit power to do it rather than having them make highly tenuous legal interpretations that rely on court intervention to determine if they step over the line every goddamned year
 
2012-06-28 08:53:15 PM  

Sum Dum Gai: The rates are far more expensive than what the insurance companies pay.


Since the fark when?! I've been in the hospital a grand total of twice in my adult life, and both times, the billed rate was a great deal (sometimes as much as 10x) higher than the rate I got after informing the appropriate people that I was uninsured.
 
2012-06-28 08:53:51 PM  

Sum Dum Gai: silgryphon: So now people have to pay for insurance. If you can't pay, you go to jail. That's wrong

If you can't pay, the government will buy insurance for you (using the rather generous subsidies also in the act.) If you won't pay for insurance, your tax bill will go up by a small amount.


what about people like this guy who is so stupid that he cant read or figure out what a law which was signed on March 23, 2010 says and how it would impact him??
We should just send him to one of the death camps and make the world a better place.
 
2012-06-28 08:54:46 PM  

namatad: Sum Dum Gai: silgryphon: So now people have to pay for insurance. If you can't pay, you go to jail. That's wrong

If you can't pay, the government will buy insurance for you (using the rather generous subsidies also in the act.) If you won't pay for insurance, your tax bill will go up by a small amount.

what about people like this guy who is so stupid that he cant read or figure out what a law which was signed on March 23, 2010 says and how it would impact him??
We should just send him to one of the death camps and make the world a better place.


Who are you calling stupid?
 
2012-06-28 08:55:54 PM  
This thread has restored some of my faith that the snark of fark, when directed at the right mark, can knock it out of the park.

/ark.
 
2012-06-28 08:56:01 PM  

namatad: KarmicDisaster: namatad: silgryphon: Well we can only hope Mitt gets elected and does better than this

"better"
We have been WAITING to hear what he is going to replace obamacare with.
We have been WAITING to hear how he is going to fix immigration.

I guess we will find out once the focus groups are done deciding for him.

He'll just do the opposite of whatever Obama did, once they tell him what that was. For example:
"This past weekend, Mitt Romney vowed that he would look at what President Obama has done regarding Israel and "do the opposite.""

ROFL


I've been saying all along that this was exactly John Kerry's strategy in 2004. This is a direct quote: "We need to keep doing what we're doing in Iraq, but do it better!"

Um...do what to do it better? He never laid out what he would do DIFFERENTLY than Bush, and got roundly thumped in the election because, while both candidates were a-holes, we at least knew what kind of a-hole we were getting with Bush.

And it's playing out again. Romney is not laying out any specifics as to what he'd do in office except:

1) Repeal ObamaCare (even though he enacted a similar law when he was governor of Mass.) -- this is now "bad legislation."
2) Do the opposite of what Obama has done in foreign policy (so, I guess, get back to pissing off the world like Bush did?)

Obama is not perfect, but I can't vote for a guy that doesn't let us know what he actually believes in.

(Not voting for Obama, either.)
 
2012-06-28 08:56:10 PM  

Gdalescrboz: As a healthy person who can afford my own insurance i dont care either way abotu this ruling. However, for the people that are going to be required to have it, i feel bad for you. Give it 10 years and you will be looking at certain criteria you have to meet in order to be on a health care plan the government requires you to have. Acohol consumption? Smoking? High risk activities? Burger king? Gambling? Not sure what it will be like, but shiat in your personal life is not going to be the same. For better or for worse, people on required gov't healthcare have lost a chunk of personal freedom. Americans could use big brother taking away their double stacker with double cheese since they can't put it down on their own



Huh?

This is exactly how insurance is today, before Obamacare.
 
2012-06-28 08:56:22 PM  
This is bullshiat! I don't care what the court said I will NOT get a abort OR marry another dude! And that's final! Lock me the fark up, I dont car!
 
2012-06-28 08:56:26 PM  

bhcompy: Here's the problem I have with this: you consider states deciding things to be outdated, but there already is a process for changing what is the law of the land in that regards(Constitutional amendment). Use that rather than shiatting all over what is a fundamental rule of governance based on the document that sets forth those rules. If you want the federal government to do all these things, give them the explicit power to do it rather than having them make highly tenuous legal interpretations that rely on court intervention to determine if they step over the line every goddamned year


Except that we have been running the country via the commerce clause and others for 200+ years now and have not had a problem. Strange. I see in the constitution the part were congress makes laws. I dont see the part where it says that they can only amend the constitution. LOL
 
2012-06-28 08:56:45 PM  

TsukasaK: Ok this is a serious post now, but didn't SCOTUS just rule that the only way the individual mandate can be enforced is as a tax? Or am I missing something here..


It can be enforced as a tax, however the law itself says none of the usual punishments for non-payment, criminal prosecution, placing of liens etc shall be used for non-payment of the penalty imposed by the HCR for not having insurance.

silgryphon: . If you can't pay, you go to jail. T


Wrong, you will not go to jail. The HCR explicitly states that none of the usual punishments for the non-payment of taxes and fees collected by the IRS shall be used as punishment for non-payment of the fee for not having insurance.
 
2012-06-28 08:59:46 PM  

bhcompy: Lorelle: People like him don't understand that people like me aren't asking for free health care, we just want to be able to purchase a health care plan.

You can, but it's expensive, because you're a huge liability. That's how insurance is supposed to work. Of course, paying cash is also an option and the rates are far cheaper than what the doctor bills insurance companies. This concept now is broken, but hopefully we realize how broken it is and move to single payer government run care sooner rather than later because it's a clusterfark now.

I'm sorry that you have a problem that causes you to be a huge insurance liability, but none of our founding documents claim that life is fair, just that, essentially, the government shouldn't get in the way of you living your life freely, and they weren't before this law was created.


No, I can't, because I tried. BTW, NOT having health care coverage is beginning to get in the way of living my life freely. Today's SC decision is a big relief to me.

jigger: COBRA is a farking rip off to the extreme. What would individual coverage have cost you? If you would have had continuous coverage with that you wouldn't have had to deal with the pre-existing condition problem. Or pay the ridiculous COBRA premiums.


I agree. There was no other option, though. It was either pay for COBRA or have no insurance at all.
 
2012-06-28 09:00:03 PM  
So the Republican talking point boils down to semantics and wordplay: it's now a tax and Obama's a lair.

That's pretty weak, guys. Pretty damned weak.
 
2012-06-28 09:01:48 PM  

JerkStore: So the Republican talking point boils down to semantics and wordplay: it's now a tax and Obama's a lair.


Especially when the chief justice of the Supreme Court, who was appointed by a Republican, nicely showed in his opinion why the argument their making doesn't work.
 
2012-06-28 09:02:41 PM  

Dog Welder: namatad: KarmicDisaster: namatad: silgryphon: Well we can only hope Mitt gets elected and does better than this

"better"
We have been WAITING to hear what he is going to replace obamacare with.
We have been WAITING to hear how he is going to fix immigration.

I guess we will find out once the focus groups are done deciding for him.

He'll just do the opposite of whatever Obama did, once they tell him what that was. For example:
"This past weekend, Mitt Romney vowed that he would look at what President Obama has done regarding Israel and "do the opposite.""

ROFL

I've been saying all along that this was exactly John Kerry's strategy in 2004. This is a direct quote: "We need to keep doing what we're doing in Iraq, but do it better!"

Um...do what to do it better? He never laid out what he would do DIFFERENTLY than Bush, and got roundly thumped in the election because, while both candidates were a-holes, we at least knew what kind of a-hole we were getting with Bush.

And it's playing out again. Romney is not laying out any specifics as to what he'd do in office except:

1) Repeal ObamaCare (even though he enacted a similar law when he was governor of Mass.) -- this is now "bad legislation."
2) Do the opposite of what Obama has done in foreign policy (so, I guess, get back to pissing off the world like Bush did?)

Obama is not perfect, but I can't vote for a guy that doesn't let us know what he actually believes in.

(Not voting for Obama, either.)


You gotta wonder what some of the "do the opposites" are going to be. Are we going to buddy up with North Korea now? Declare peace in Iraq and attack Germany? Stop using drones and send in ground troops? Restore the space program money? Cut defense? Bill farmers for growing food instead of paying them? Is Putin going to be Romney's pal? Send all the Mexicans home and have all the ones in Mexico come up here? End the war on drugs? What the hell does "do the opposite" mean with a complex problem and why would that necessarily be better?
 
2012-06-28 09:03:06 PM  

Sum Dum Gai: bhcompy: You can, but it's expensive, because you're a huge liability. That's how insurance is supposed to work. Of course, paying cash is also an option and the rates are far cheaper than what the doctor bills insurance companies. This concept now is broken, but hopefully we realize how broken it is and move to single payer government run care sooner rather than later because it's a clusterfark now.

The rates are far more expensive than what the insurance companies pay. Insurance companies bargain down the price a lot. Self-pay always pays the most, or none at all. (e.g. bankruptcy)

Insurers have a lot of power to dictate how much they will pay. Private citizens have none of that.


Insurance companies get billed the full amount and maybe only pay a portion, and that's after your deductible. Guess who's responsible for the rest? Like I've mentioned a few times in the past few days, I had to deal with an normal 2-d ultrasound that was billed to my insurance company for $2k. My expense on covering it was $400 after Aetna paid their share. Problem is that a normal 2-d ultrasound is about 200-300$ if you pay cash. And I also had to deal with a mole/growth that I had removed: biller told me upfront I can pay $200 cash to get it removed(freeze it, slice it with a razor) and tested for cancer or they can bill my insurance company for the few thousand they bill them for and I can pay my deductible and whatever else they don't cover, which would be more than what I would pay in cash.

Some doctors would rather negotiate a cash payment from you right now rather than deal with weeks and months of wrangling with the insurance company fighting over the right code, their reimbursement rate, etc.
 
Displayed 50 of 3382 comments

First | « | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | » | Last

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report