Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Talking Points Memo)   Tea party groups regrouping and organizing to restore your constitutional right to be denied heath care   (2012.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 133
    More: Cool  
•       •       •

2503 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Jun 2012 at 5:31 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-01 09:24:29 AM  

Independent as Fark: Lando Lincoln: Romney is going to repeal Obamacare, and replace it with Romneycare, which is Obamacare minus the word "Obama" and minus the way to pay for it.

I suspect the way to pay for it -- the law that requires every American to give money to the insurance industry -- is the thing Republicans like best about Obamacare.


He will set up a system where the individual states can keep it or ditch it. We will see which states go broke and which states prosper.
 
2012-07-01 09:31:45 AM  

badhatharry: Independent as Fark: Lando Lincoln: Romney is going to repeal Obamacare, and replace it with Romneycare, which is Obamacare minus the word "Obama" and minus the way to pay for it.

I suspect the way to pay for it -- the law that requires every American to give money to the insurance industry -- is the thing Republicans like best about Obamacare.

He will set up a system where the individual states can keep it or ditch it. We will see which states go broke and which states prosper.


By prosper, do you mean states like Texas where nearly 26% of their residents are uninsured?

Link
 
2012-07-01 09:40:18 AM  

Mrtraveler01: badhatharry: Independent as Fark: Lando Lincoln: Romney is going to repeal Obamacare, and replace it with Romneycare, which is Obamacare minus the word "Obama" and minus the way to pay for it.

I suspect the way to pay for it -- the law that requires every American to give money to the insurance industry -- is the thing Republicans like best about Obamacare.

He will set up a system where the individual states can keep it or ditch it. We will see which states go broke and which states prosper.

By prosper, do you mean states like Texas where nearly 26% of their residents are uninsured?

Link


Mrtraveler01: badhatharry: Independent as Fark: Lando Lincoln: Romney is going to repeal Obamacare, and replace it with Romneycare, which is Obamacare minus the word "Obama" and minus the way to pay for it.

I suspect the way to pay for it -- the law that requires every American to give money to the insurance industry -- is the thing Republicans like best about Obamacare.

He will set up a system where the individual states can keep it or ditch it. We will see which states go broke and which states prosper.

By prosper, do you mean states like Texas where nearly 26% of their residents are uninsured?

Link


Texans would rather be uninsured than unemployed. That will be the next push for progressives. The right to employment. We'll just have a government program to employee everyone.
 
2012-07-01 09:41:20 AM  

vygramul: dkendr: Who the fark is being DENIED health ... oh, you're a troll. Sorry.

*points, laughs at dkendr*

It's amazing how many of you tools have nearly zero grasp of the problem, yet rail against the solution that your side proposed when a Democrat says, "OK, let's do it."


Many of us don't like the solution, dummy. But it's a damn sight better than the Randian hole that the morons and sheep in the Tea Party advocate.

/Wants MORE Socialism.
//Way more.
 
2012-07-01 09:43:53 AM  

badhatharry: Texans would rather be uninsured than unemployed.


You say this like it's a choice between one or the other? Why do you make this sound like a good thing?

True, there are plenty of jobs at Wal-Mart and Taco Bell in Texas and neither of them offer insurance.

Also doesn't help that Texas also lets insurance companies run rampant and charge old and really sick people premiums so high that most people can't afford them.

But I thought tort reform was going to bring costs down in Texas?

*bzzt*

Guess the right was wrong once again.
 
2012-07-01 09:56:04 AM  

ghare: The Laffer Curve?


The Laffer Curve is generally accepted by economists. The debate is over where on the curve we are. I haven't had any supply-side economist tell my we're to the right of the peak. The only ones that do are the highly-political ones in the conservative media spin machine.
 
2012-07-01 10:00:11 AM  

parkthebus: It's a done deal. Obama will lose, Romney (imperfect as he is) will be POTUS and will repeal Obamacare with a legislative super majority. You know this is true, even if you hate it.


Economists would say that you would be willing to provide odds on a bet, and that those odds represent certainty. So would you be willing to put up $10,000 against a $1 bet? $10? $100? $1000?
 
2012-07-01 10:05:38 AM  

enry: That's how it passed the Senate in the first place.


No, the 60 votes passed it, THEN Brown got elected. THEN the reconciliation happened.
 
2012-07-01 10:42:41 AM  

badhatharry: Texans would rather be uninsured than unemployed. That will be the next push for progressives. The right to employment. We'll just have a government program to employee everyone.


Stop listening to Glenn Beck. It's rotting your brain. Seriously. Just stop.
 
2012-07-01 10:45:45 AM  

badhatharry: Independent as Fark: Lando Lincoln: Romney is going to repeal Obamacare, and replace it with Romneycare, which is Obamacare minus the word "Obama" and minus the way to pay for it.

I suspect the way to pay for it -- the law that requires every American to give money to the insurance industry -- is the thing Republicans like best about Obamacare.

He will set up a system where the individual states can keep it or ditch it. We will see which states go broke and which states prosper.


Hopefully the red state ones. You know, those bootstrappy patriots will just pray their way out. As they stand by the mailbox for their government assistance check to come in. While praying that government stays out of their healthcare.
 
2012-07-01 10:50:16 AM  

vygramul: dkendr: Who the fark is being DENIED health ... oh, you're a troll. Sorry.

*points, laughs at dkendr*

It's amazing how many of you tools have nearly zero grasp of the problem, yet rail against the solution that your side proposed when a Democrat says, "OK, let's do it."


It's amazing how you missed me goofing on the original submitter in your rush to "point, laugh." Your reading comprehension is certainly Supreme Court-level.
 
2012-07-01 10:52:30 AM  

dkendr: vygramul: dkendr: Who the fark is being DENIED health ... oh, you're a troll. Sorry.

*points, laughs at dkendr*

It's amazing how many of you tools have nearly zero grasp of the problem, yet rail against the solution that your side proposed when a Democrat says, "OK, let's do it."

It's amazing how you missed me goofing on the original submitter in your rush to "point, laugh." Your reading comprehension is certainly Supreme Court-level.


Yes, I should take the legal advice of some guy on the internet over the Supreme Court.

You're right, people aren't denied health care, just health insurance. And when uninsured people do get health care, they go to the ER where people like you and me foot the bill.

Why do you hate personal responsibility?
 
2012-07-01 10:54:55 AM  

Mrtraveler01: dkendr: vygramul: dkendr: Who the fark is being DENIED health ... oh, you're a troll. Sorry.

*points, laughs at dkendr*

It's amazing how many of you tools have nearly zero grasp of the problem, yet rail against the solution that your side proposed when a Democrat says, "OK, let's do it."

It's amazing how you missed me goofing on the original submitter in your rush to "point, laugh." Your reading comprehension is certainly Supreme Court-level.

Yes, I should take the legal advice of some guy on the internet over the Supreme Court.

You're right, people aren't denied health care, just health insurance. And when uninsured people do get health care, they go to the ER where people like you and me foot the bill.

Why do you hate personal responsibility?


Personal responsibility, though a GOP virtue, does violate the Prime Directive in this case:

Hate Obama and every last thing he says, does, signs into law, posts on facebook or thinks in his brain.
 
2012-07-01 10:59:19 AM  

coeyagi: Hate Obama and every last thing he says, does, signs into law, posts on facebook or thinks in his brain.


And even hate ideas presented today that they came up with years ago.

'This plan sucks!'
'Its very similar to what you offered back in the 90s.'
'THIS PLAN SUCKS I HATE YOU BAMAFART.'
 
2012-07-01 11:09:02 AM  

dkendr: vygramul: dkendr: Who the fark is being DENIED health ... oh, you're a troll. Sorry.

*points, laughs at dkendr*

It's amazing how many of you tools have nearly zero grasp of the problem, yet rail against the solution that your side proposed when a Democrat says, "OK, let's do it."

It's amazing how you missed me goofing on the original submitter in your rush to "point, laugh." Your reading comprehension is certainly Supreme Court-level.


I love how you think that a health insurance company never DENIES health care to someone with a pre-existing condition.
 
2012-07-01 11:11:01 AM  

coeyagi: badhatharry: Independent as Fark: Lando Lincoln: Romney is going to repeal Obamacare, and replace it with Romneycare, which is Obamacare minus the word "Obama" and minus the way to pay for it.

I suspect the way to pay for it -- the law that requires every American to give money to the insurance industry -- is the thing Republicans like best about Obamacare.

He will set up a system where the individual states can keep it or ditch it. We will see which states go broke and which states prosper.

Hopefully the red state ones. You know, those bootstrappy patriots will just pray their way out. As they stand by the mailbox for their government assistance check to come in. While praying that government stays out of their healthcare.


But hey, at least they'll have plenty of low-wage, low-skill jobs that offer no benefits like health insurance.
 
2012-07-01 11:15:26 AM  

Mrtraveler01: coeyagi: badhatharry: Independent as Fark: Lando Lincoln: Romney is going to repeal Obamacare, and replace it with Romneycare, which is Obamacare minus the word "Obama" and minus the way to pay for it.

I suspect the way to pay for it -- the law that requires every American to give money to the insurance industry -- is the thing Republicans like best about Obamacare.

He will set up a system where the individual states can keep it or ditch it. We will see which states go broke and which states prosper.

Hopefully the red state ones. You know, those bootstrappy patriots will just pray their way out. As they stand by the mailbox for their government assistance check to come in. While praying that government stays out of their healthcare.

But hey, at least they'll have plenty of low-wage, low-skill jobs that offer no benefits like health insurance.


And because they make so little that they may pay no federal income tax, they get to be called "lazy" and "freeloaders" by the GOP despite working 35 or 40 hrs a week (and may have another job too) just so you can get your bargain bin DVDs for $3.
 
2012-07-01 11:22:02 AM  

coeyagi: Hate Obama and every last thing he says, does, signs into law, posts on facebook or thinks in his brain.


And yet ...

www.myqwip.com
(click on image to vote in new window)

For the most part this poll has been exposed only here on Fark, but the only way I can read it is that those that hate Obama are strictly limited in numbers.
 
2012-07-01 11:22:15 AM  
I get the basic concept of mandate + no denial based on pre-existing conditions = expanded pool = lower cost premiums, but what I do not understand is where do we get the money to pay for the 50 million uninsured forced to purchase into private plans that they cannot afford on their own?

/Genuinely have not heard where the money comes from to subsidize.

//Trying to have an honest conversation... I assume my question will be answered in a thoughtful manner that does not involve invocation of bootstraps or Koch-sucking?
 
2012-07-01 11:27:04 AM  

AntiNerd: coeyagi: Hate Obama and every last thing he says, does, signs into law, posts on facebook or thinks in his brain.

And yet ...

[www.myqwip.com image 300x400]
(click on image to vote in new window)

For the most part this poll has been exposed only here on Fark, but the only way I can read it is that those that hate Obama are strictly limited in numbers.


They're pretty vocal though. Same things as news - there is lots more positive crap happening in our world but no one cares until there is a gushing knife wound or arson involved.
 
2012-07-01 11:40:00 AM  
its all about Freedom.
 
2012-07-01 11:42:35 AM  
daveUSMC
...but what I do not understand is where do we get the money to pay for the 50 million uninsured forced to purchase into private plans that they cannot afford on their own?

- 0.9% additional tax on earned income over $200K (individual) or $250K (couple)
- 3.8% additional tax on unearned (investment) income over $200K (individual) or $250K (couple)
- Medical Savings Accounts limit changed from $5,000 to $2,500 (so thatother $2,500 is now taxable)
- Annual fee on manufacturers and importers of brand-name pharmaceuticals
- Penalty on employers with more than 50 employees who don't offer health insurance

Plus a slew of small obscure taxes (10% on tanning booths, 2.3% on medical devices etc.)

Clearly, this is the death of liberty and the destruction of this country as we know it...

More info on the IRS site
 
2012-07-01 11:44:53 AM  

daveUSMC: I get the basic concept of mandate + no denial based on pre-existing conditions = expanded pool = lower cost premiums, but what I do not understand is where do we get the money to pay for the 50 million uninsured forced to purchase into private plans that they cannot afford on their own?

/Genuinely have not heard where the money comes from to subsidize.

//Trying to have an honest conversation... I assume my question will be answered in a thoughtful manner that does not involve invocation of bootstraps or Koch-sucking?


I admittedly do not have the math here, so the magnitude of this effect requires study, even though it is non-trivial. Consider the following facts:

1) There are ZERO hospitals that do not lose money on their emergency rooms.

2) Uninsured do not see a doctor until the conditions are severe, and then they go to emergency rooms. Severe conditions are expensive to treat.

3) Most people, with insurance, would go to a doctor and many conditions are trivially and inexpensively prevented.

So, consider that hospitals aren't just going to eat the cost of 1) out of the generosity of their souls. They pass those costs on to the rest of us, including the government medicare programs. And preventive care is way less expensive, so the government is trading expensive care we all pay for inexpensive care that we all pay.
 
2012-07-01 11:48:04 AM  
It looks like it took quite a few hours for dkendr to get treatment for that sick burn he suffered earlier in the thread. Must not have insurance.
 
2012-07-01 11:50:54 AM  

coeyagi: They're pretty vocal though. Same things as news - there is lots more positive crap happening in our world but no one cares until there is a gushing knife wound or arson involved.


If it can't fit on a bumper sticker, its not worth caring.
 
2012-07-01 12:07:39 PM  

Prank Call of Cthulhu: It looks like it took quite a few hours for dkendr to get treatment for that sick burn he suffered earlier in the thread. Must not have insurance.


Most intellectual bankruptcies start that way.
 
2012-07-01 12:08:55 PM  

MisterRonbo: daveUSMC
...but what I do not understand is where do we get the money to pay for the 50 million uninsured forced to purchase into private plans that they cannot afford on their own?

- 0.9% additional tax on earned income over $200K (individual) or $250K (couple)
- 3.8% additional tax on unearned (investment) income over $200K (individual) or $250K (couple)
- Medical Savings Accounts limit changed from $5,000 to $2,500 (so thatother $2,500 is now taxable)
- Annual fee on manufacturers and importers of brand-name pharmaceuticals
- Penalty on employers with more than 50 employees who don't offer health insurance

Plus a slew of small obscure taxes (10% on tanning booths, 2.3% on medical devices etc.)

Clearly, this is the death of liberty and the destruction of this country as we know it...

More info on the IRS site


Now why can't we all just have nice, semi respectful conversations with simple and polite questions and responses like this? Why is everyone escalating to immediate flame-war derpcon 3?
 
2012-07-01 12:14:50 PM  

daveUSMC: I get the basic concept of mandate + no denial based on pre-existing conditions = expanded pool = lower cost premiums, but what I do not understand is where do we get the money to pay for the 50 million uninsured forced to purchase into private plans that they cannot afford on their own?

/Genuinely have not heard where the money comes from to subsidize.

//Trying to have an honest conversation... I assume my question will be answered in a thoughtful manner that does not involve invocation of bootstraps or Koch-sucking?


The state exchanges will increase the pool of new buyers. It will allow people to buy insurance that couldn't before. Mostly the self employed or those without company benefits. Although I don't think it's going to be enough people. Everybody paying will have higher premiums.
 
2012-07-01 12:56:22 PM  

badhatharry: The state exchanges will increase the pool of new buyers. It will allow people to buy insurance that couldn't before. Mostly the self employed or those without company benefits. Although I don't think it's going to be enough people. Everybody paying will have higher premiums.


That's not what's happening in Massachusetts...

My insurance is through the Health Connector, and our premiums are lower and we actually have better coverage than when we were insured through my wife's former employer.

...And I'm sure you're aware of the percentage of people in the Commonwealth who are covered.
 
2012-07-01 12:59:33 PM  

keylock71: And I'm sure you're aware of the percentage of people in the Commonwealth who are covered.


Something like 98%, right? Just imagine how horrible it would be if 98% of US citizens were covered by health insurance!
 
2012-07-01 01:10:36 PM  

DarwiOdrade: Something like 98%, right?


Yep...
 
2012-07-01 04:20:50 PM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: How many defenders of freedom will "celebrate free America's last birthday" next week only to blow off fingers/toes/hands/feet/arms/genitals and go to the ER with no ability to pay?


Oh, don't worry about them, the rest of us will pick up the tab.
 
2012-07-01 11:37:54 PM  
A National Health System for America

January 2, 1989

This report is currently available only in PDF format.


http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/1989/a-national-health-syst em -for-america



"Personal responsibility extends to the purchase of health insurance. Citizens should not be able to cheat their neighbors by not buying insurance, particularly when they can afford it, and expect others to pay for their care when they need it.

An "individual mandate should be applied when the larger health-care system has been fundamentally changed."

- New Gingrinch June 2007


"The idea for a health care plan [in Massachusetts] was not mine alone," Romney explained. "The Heritage Foundation - a great conservative think tank - helped on that.
I'm told Newt Gingrich, one of the very first people who came up with the idea of an individual mandate, did that years and years ago":

ROMNEY: It was seen as a conservative idea to say, you know what? People have a responsibility for caring for themselves if they can. We'll help people who can't care for themselves, but if you can care for yourself, you gotta take care of yourself and pay your own bills.


The controversial individual mandate that was upheld Thursday by the U.S. Supreme Court stems back more than 20 years, believed to have originated with a prominent conservative think tank.

The mandate, requiring every American to purchase health insurance, appeared in a 1989 published proposal by Stuart M. Butler of the conservative Heritage Foundation called "Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans," which included a provision to "mandate all households to obtain adequate insurance."

The Heritage Foundation "substantially revised" its proposal four years later, according to a 1994 analysis by the Congressional Budget Office. But the idea of an individual health insurance mandate later appeared in two bills introduced by Republican lawmakers in 1993, according to the non-partisan research group ProCon.org. Among the supporters of the bills were senators Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, who today oppose the mandate under current law.


i1.kym-cdn.com
 
Displayed 33 of 133 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report