Originally Posted by RichieLion

Hey, who's give a rat's patootie if the whole idea of the government forcing you to purchase a product is patently unconstitutional?....

Oh, there'll be lots who will suddenly "give a patootie" when they find they got what others told them they should wish for. From today's Wall Street Journal...

• Pharmaceutical companies will very likely cancel the deep discounts the bill required them to give seniors whose prescription expenses were in the "doughnut hole" of the Medicare prescription drug program.

• Medical residents who got grants based on their agreement to practice in either low-income clinics or unserved rural areas will certainly lose that financial support.

• The insurance exchange setup that was to permit and encourage health insurance companies to compete nationally gets disbanded. Insurance companies will return to competing only on a state to state basis, where it's common that one insurer tends to dominate each state. The reduced competition is projected to result in significant premium increases.

• And of course 30-40 million people return to being uninsured. That doesn't mean they won't get healthcare--they will. It's just that they won't be required to pay for it. All if those who do pay for their health insurance will see massive premium increases as the result of healthcare providers passing along their costs of treating the uninsured on to those who are paying for insurance by increasing their charges to insurance companies.

ObamaCare is far from perfect. There are lots of improvements and changes possible. But if he Court overturns it, as expected, neither Congress or Romney has presented an alternative plan. Romney championed essentially the same plan as ObamaCare in Massachusetts, where it is widely popular and reportedly effective. But Romney has now eschewed his plan, responding to right-wing pressure, even though he has not presented any kind of alternative with any specifics for use nationally. Does he mean that healthcare isn't a national problem? That the states shoud be responsible for addressing he healthcare problems on a state-by-state basis? If that's his idea, he hasn't said so.

No, Richie, if the Court overturns ObamaCare there'll be millions of people who'll give a patootie. I know I will. And I suspect you will too, when you get that letter with the big premium increase. Or if you get really sick and require expensive treatment, that insurance cancellation notice.

You may get what you wish for. But I don't think you'll be at all happy about it.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

Oh, there'll be lots who will suddenly "give a patootie" when they find they got what others told them they should wish for. From today's Wall Street Journal...

• Pharmaceutical companies will very likely cancel the deep discounts the bill required them to give seniors whose prescription expenses were in the "doughnut hole" of the Medicare prescription drug program.

• Medical residents who got grants based on their agreement to practice in either low-income clinics or unserved rural areas will certainly lose that financial support.

• The insurance exchange setup that was to permit and encourage health insurance companies to compete nationally gets disbanded. Insurance companies will return to competing only on a state to state basis, where it's common that one insurer tends to dominate each state. The reduced competition is projected to result in significant premium increases.

• And of course 30-40 million people return to being uninsured. That doesn't mean they won't get healthcare--they will. It's just that they won't be required to pay for it. All if those who do pay for their health insurance will see massive premium increases as the result of healthcare providers passing along their costs of treating the uninsured on to those who are paying for insurance by increasing their charges to insurance companies.

ObamaCare is far from perfect. There are lots of improvements and changes possible. But if he Court overturns it, as expected, neither Congress or Romney has presented an alternative plan. Romney championed essentially the same plan as ObamaCare in Massachusetts, where it is widely popular and reportedly effective. But Romney has now eschewed his plan, responding to right-wing pressure, even though he has not presented any kind of alternative with any specifics for use nationally. Does he mean that healthcare isn't a national problem? That the states shoud be responsible for addressing he healthcare problems on a state-by-state basis? If that's his idea, he hasn't said so.

No, Richie, if the Court overturns ObamaCare there'll be millions of people who'll give a patootie. I know I will. And I suspect you will too, when you get that letter with the big premium increase. Or if you get really sick and require expensive treatment, that insurance cancellation notice.

You may get what you wish for. But I don't think you'll be at all happy about it.

Nothing is free. The ObamaCare Bill is way too expansive and we haven't got into a fraction of it's mandates yet.

I think you misunderstand the will of the people. Some 70% of people in some polls are against this huge government power grab. They like some provisions in the bill, if asked, but reject the bill itself.

This is one of those things that needs to be buried, and then concerns on health care options can be worked on in manageable ways, and in limited fashion.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

...your posted thoughts are as if you will be voting for Romney with similar hopes as if throwing a penny in a well, hoping your wish comes true and with little more expectation than that....

Well said. A pretty accurate description of how I feel.

The difference between you and me is that I've tried to provide specific reasons and examples of why I feel as I do. Others here state their beliefs and criticize the choices of others here by repeating ideological mantra and soundbites or pasting in links to reports or opinion by unbalanced sources, with little critical analysis and comparison of alternatives and the choices we've been presented with in this campaign.

I don't understand why everyone is so all fired up about obamacare.Other presidents have considered national health care programs. The problem with this one is not to give affordable health care to the people is all about control. And if it does go through in 20 years when it is broke you will look back and wish for some thing new. Population control is one motive. When we get grouped with China and Russia then you see where we went wrong. After the election if obama gets in all hell will break lose. This guy and his buddies are very dangerous. I'm not saying Romney will be much better, we can only hope.

I just know how we made it all these years without Obamascare. And now after less than two years in effect and without the major impacts implemented yet it gets touted as the savings grace of us all.

Experience and reality says.....BS!!

btk

Originally Posted by billethkid

I just know how we made it all these years without Obamascare. And now after less than two years in effect and without the major impacts implemented yet it gets touted as the savings grace of us all.

Experience and reality says.....BS!!

btk

Mitt Romney has a much better idea. End Medicare as we know it and replace that with a voucher system so you can go out in the open market and buy your own health care. The downside is insurance companies will once again be able to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions and drop you once you get sick, and they can put a limit on spending. Can't wait to see how this all works out.

Originally Posted by janmcn

Mitt Romney has a much better idea. End Medicare as we know it and replace that with a voucher system so you can go out in the open market and buy your own health care. The downside is insurance companies will once again be able to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions and drop you once you get sick, and they can put a limit on spending. Can't wait to see how this all works out.

If 70% of Americans are against ObamaCare, as is frequently stated, I'd be willing to bet lots of money that not too many will be on board for this idea.

Let's see how it would work...no more Medicare, VA insurance or any other form of government funded health insurance whether you paid in for fifty years or not...then the government is going to give you a voucher and tell you to have at it, buy whatever insurance you want but don't come back for more if the insurance companies raise premiums above the voucher amount. But not to worry folks, the competition between the insurance companies will keep premiums affordable. And stuff like pre-existing conditions or policy drops? Competition will protect you on those fronts too. Like Gordon Gecko said in the movie "Wall Street"...greed is good.

Oh yeah, that'll be popular. And I'm sure that everyone will have implicit trust in the insurance companies not to raise their premiums above what can be afforded with the fixed amount of voucher money.

Let's see, since I retired in 1998, my health insurance premiums have just about tripled. If someone gave me a voucher that would cover my premiums back then, you figure how far under water and uninsured I would be now. That voucher idea doesn't sound to good to me.

By the way, that's the Paul Ryan proposal, isn't it?

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

If 70% of Americans are against ObamaCare, as is frequently stated, I'd be willing to bet lots of money that not too many will be on board for this idea.

Let's see how it would work...no more Medicare, VA insurance or any other form of government funded health insurance whether you paid in for fifty years or not...then the government is going to give you a voucher and tell you to have at it, buy whatever insurance you want but don't come back for more if the insurance companies raise premiums above the voucher amount. But not to worry folks, the competition between the insurance companies will keep premiums affordable. And stuff like pre-existing conditions or policy drops? Competition will protect you on those fronts too. Like Gordon Gecko said in the movie "Wall Street"...greed is good.

Oh yeah, that'll be popular. And I'm sure that everyone will have implicit trust in the insurance companies not to raise their premiums above what can be afforded with the fixed amount of voucher money.

Let's see, since I retired in 1998, my health insurance premiums have just about tripled. If someone gave me a voucher that would cover my premiums back then, you figure how far under water and uninsured I would be now. That voucher idea doesn't sound to good to me.

By the way, that's the Paul Ryan proposal, isn't it?

VK,

Once again, you are right on the money and absolutely right. YET, you continue to say you are going to vote for Mr. Romney. How can you write such intelligent posts as this and then say Romney is your choice? Of course, you can tell us whatever you want but then when you are in the voting booth, you can pull whichever lever and no one will know which you pulled.

Remember, Conservatives, your wife may be telling you that she is in agreement with your right-wing ideas but may be just saying that to avoid an arguement. When she is in the voting booth, she probably will pull the lever for Obama and women's equality - and will be cancelling your vote!

[QUOTE=Villages Kahuna;512307]If 70% of Americans are against ObamaCare, as is frequently stated, I'd be willing to bet lots of money that not too many will be on board for this idea.
QUOTE]

I'd be willing to bet 95% or more of the 70% against it, couldn't tell you any specifics about the legislation beyond the sound bite opposition they have heard from limbaugh, hannity and their ilk. They know zero about how the legislation, or the ending of it, will affect them personally, much less anyone else.

Originally Posted by billethkid

I just know how we made it all these years without Obamascare. And now after less than two years in effect and without the major impacts implemented yet it gets touted as the savings grace of us all.

Experience and reality says.....BS!!

btk

Obamascare? Really? I actually thought you were above that kind of silliness.

[quote=eweissenbach;512319]

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

If 70% of Americans are against ObamaCare, as is frequently stated, I'd be willing to bet lots of money that not too many will be on board for this idea.
QUOTE]

I'd be willing to bet 95% or more of the 70% against it, couldn't tell you any specifics about the legislation beyond the sound bite opposition they have heard from limbaugh, hannity and their ilk. They know zero about how the legislation, or the ending of it, will affect them personally, much less anyone else.

I disagree, but not totally ! Most polls have folks totally opposed to the bill itself, but align very well with many, maybe most, of the aspects of the bill, which is where I come down.

Why folks are so negative on it is HOW it was done......this country was totally lied to from beginning to end on this fiasco and that is what it turned into.

This bill can be a basis for a good health insurance bill, one that ACTUALLY ADDRESSES COST which is what we were promised but was NOT addressed at all...it can address tort reform which is connected to cost.

A bill that is openly discussed...let US, the populace see the debate as we were promised....too big of a bill for blackmail and backroom deals.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

If 70% of Americans are against ObamaCare, as is frequently stated, I'd be willing to bet lots of money that not too many will be on board for this idea.

Let's see how it would work...no more Medicare, VA insurance or any other form of government funded health insurance whether you paid in for fifty years or not...then the government is going to give you a voucher and tell you to have at it, buy whatever insurance you want but don't come back for more if the insurance companies raise premiums above the voucher amount. But not to worry folks, the competition between the insurance companies will keep premiums affordable. And stuff like pre-existing conditions or policy drops? Competition will protect you on those fronts too. Like Gordon Gecko said in the movie "Wall Street"...greed is good.

Oh yeah, that'll be popular. And I'm sure that everyone will have implicit trust in the insurance companies not to raise their premiums above what can be afforded with the fixed amount of voucher money.

Let's see, since I retired in 1998, my health insurance premiums have just about tripled. If someone gave me a voucher that would cover my premiums back then, you figure how far under water and uninsured I would be now. That voucher idea doesn't sound to good to me.

By the way, that's the Paul Ryan proposal, isn't it?

That's the Paul Ryan Budget which Mitt Romney thinks is "mah-ve-lous".

VK wrote, "
Let's see how it would work...no more Medicare, VA insurance or any other form of government funded health insurance whether you paid in for fifty years or not...then the government is going to give you a voucher and tell you to have at it, buy whatever insurance you want but don't come back for more if the insurance companies raise premiums above the voucher amount. But not to worry folks, the competition between the insurance companies will keep premiums affordable. And stuff like pre-existing conditions or policy drops? Competition will protect you on those fronts too. Like Gordon Gecko said in the movie "Wall Street"...greed is good.

Oh yeah, that'll be popular. And I'm sure that everyone will have implicit trust in the insurance companies not to raise their premiums above what can be afforded with the fixed amount of voucher money.

Let's see, since I retired in 1998, my health insurance premiums have just about tripled. If someone gave me a voucher that would cover my premiums back then, you figure how far under water and uninsured I would be now. That voucher idea doesn't sound to good to me.

By the way, that's the Paul Ryan proposal, isn't it?"
__________________________

I would like to hear some like Bucco or RichieLion address the facts in VK's posting, which I think hit the nail on the head. They are always asking for a discussion of issues. This is a major issue.

If those are not the ideas in Paul Ryan's proposal and would not be the ones that Mitt Romney would support, what exactly does Romney support for health care reform?

[quote=eweissenbach;512319]

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

If 70% of Americans are against ObamaCare, as is frequently stated, I'd be willing to bet lots of money that not too many will be on board for this idea.
QUOTE]

I'd be willing to bet 95% or more of the 70% against it, couldn't tell you any specifics about the legislation beyond the sound bite opposition they have heard from limbaugh, hannity and their ilk. They know zero about how the legislation, or the ending of it, will affect them personally, much less anyone else.

Exactly.

Originally Posted by buggyone

VK wrote, "
Let's see how it would work...no more Medicare, VA insurance or any other form of government funded health insurance whether you paid in for fifty years or not...then the government is going to give you a voucher and tell you to have at it, buy whatever insurance you want but don't come back for more if the insurance companies raise premiums above the voucher amount. But not to worry folks, the competition between the insurance companies will keep premiums affordable. And stuff like pre-existing conditions or policy drops? Competition will protect you on those fronts too. Like Gordon Gecko said in the movie "Wall Street"...greed is good.

Oh yeah, that'll be popular. And I'm sure that everyone will have implicit trust in the insurance companies not to raise their premiums above what can be afforded with the fixed amount of voucher money.

Let's see, since I retired in 1998, my health insurance premiums have just about tripled. If someone gave me a voucher that would cover my premiums back then, you figure how far under water and uninsured I would be now. That voucher idea doesn't sound to good to me.

By the way, that's the Paul Ryan proposal, isn't it?"
__________________________

I would like to hear some like Bucco or RichieLion address the facts in VK's posting, which I think hit the nail on the head. They are always asking for a discussion of issues. This is a major issue.

If those are not the ideas in Paul Ryan's proposal and would not be the ones that Mitt Romney would support, what exactly does Romney support for health care reform?

Since you mentioned me, I will respond.

Ryan's budget was put forth as a beginning.....was made very clear it was NOT a final product. On the vouchers, they increase as with COLA,not as you guys are stating it....fear is that COLA will not keep up with health costs and THAT is the reason we need some legislation to control health costs, which Obamacare does not even address or come close to. They may or may not work

You guys are jumping on a proposal that was doomed from the start because of the senate....always was pegged to begin discussion but that never happened.

Talking about this right now is not really a good undertaking for a number of reasons...first of all you are already misrepresenting it (vouchers and you dont mention how they do increase in value..probably just forgot) and the entire health cost situation will need to be reworked totally unless the SCOTUS allows it to stand as it is.

I know you want to jump on Romney and the Repubs....thats fine..that is what you want to do, but this is not the time. You havent heard anyone asking about the Presidents plan in immigration he announced..like HOW do you enforce it, etc. It is all election year verbage. BUT.....Ryan tried to address costs...he actually spoke to the committee that the President appointed and then totally ignored.

If you want to hammer away it, have at it...its up to you and again, do not allow facts to deter you, but then that does not seem to ever be a worry.

Already we have blown a hole in VK s little rant....the voucher does not have a forever amount attached to it. It does increase so misrepresentation already..you can check it if you wish but those are the facts.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/art...yssey=nav|head

Let me say a few things if you dont mind because you are correct...I do enjoy discussin issues and unlike you folks I have no axe to grind with anyone (my problem is and has been always with only Obama and his character).

I have posted already on this thread that the overwhelming majority of americans oppose this Obama care, HOWEVER, if you look at the parts of it, they overwhelmingly support the parts. The parties are not that far apart...the problem is and is with the american people HOW THE BILL WAS put together...the lying...the fact that it does not even address at all COSTS, which was what we were all told it was all about.....it does not address tort reform whch again we were told was VITAL. I supported the plan Obama presented during the primary and general election for gosh sake.

THEN...he played politics....he did blackmail to get votes...he sold out to the insurance industry and thus had to actually make up things to pay for it...I mean it is funded literally with what ifs, and maybes.

It needs to be put together correctly...

"This is, of course, a trick question. That paragraph describes both the Affordable Care Act and Ryan’s proposed Medicare reforms. The insurance markets in both plans are essentially identical. And for good reason.

The Affordable Care Act was based on two decades of Republican thinking about health care. The basic structure was first proposed by the conservative Heritage Foundation in 1989, first written into a bill by Senate Republicans in 1993, and first passed into law by a Republican governor by the name of Mitt Romney in 2005.

We need to put it together without all the crap he put in the bill to sell it....without selling out we can have great health care bill.

You folks just want to beat on Romney...that is what you do but you can only do it on this issue if you pick out little stuff and leave things out as you did already and VK did.


PS...my post 26 addressed this also but it is ignored because no good slams in it