Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=12thMan;923250]The full law doesn't go into effect until 2014, when the exchanges are up and running. What analysis could possibly capture it's effect on healthcare inflation and spending? We still don't know the number of people that will join the pool.[/quote]Are there any estimates that costs and spending don't rise in the next few years?

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=Giantone;923279][quote=Slingin Sammy 33;923225]


Sorry Sammy but this ,this is the bullshit that the GOP throws out there to scare everybody over the arge of 70..and it just ain't true.[/quote]Rationing happens in other countries with socialized medicine, why won't it happen here?

[url=http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mike-sargent/2009/07/06/what-cnn-didnt-ask-about-canada-health-care-rationing]What CNN Didn't Ask About Canada Health Care Rationing | NewsBusters.org[/url]

[url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124451570546396929.html]Canada's ObamaCare Precedent - WSJ.com[/url]

Even the Physicians for National Health agree their will be rationing. Check out the FAQ question on "will there be rationing".
[url=http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single-payer-faq#rationing]Single-Payer FAQ | Physicians for a National Health Program[/url]

It's common knowledge that UK and Canada for example set an amount the gov't will pay for healthcare, then it works to stay within that amount....how can rationing not happen in that environment?

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=Lotus;923247]One would hope that we are doing things differently than Hoover.[/quote]haha, agree.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=12thMan;923248]SS33, you sources about the costs are off, my man. The CBO this Spring projected the law would cut the deficit by $50 Billion more than they originally thought. I would suggest you take a gander at the real numbers.

[URL]http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-13-Coverage%20Estimates.pdf[/URL]

Ezra Klein gives a good breakdown of the numbers here.

[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/cbo-health-reform-to-cut-deficit-by-50-billion-more-than-we-thought/2011/08/25/gIQAXgPSES_blog.html"]CBO: Health reform to cut deficit by $50 billion more than we thought - The Washington Post[/URL]

Also, you say that $500B in new taxes on ALL Americans. Well that's not true either. Without even breaking out the calculator the law doesn't affect ALL Americans, so how could it jack up taxes on ALL Americans?

You make no mention of these benefits, some of which have kicked in now. Some later when the law fully kicks in 2014.

No mention of $800 billion tax credits for lower income families.
Insurance companies can't drop you because of pre-existing condition.
No mention of closing the Medicare doughnut hole for seniors[/quote]You are absolutely correct, after reading your link my numbers were off. I stated $ 700B added to the defecit....and per the CBO estimate the number is over $ 1T. My bad.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

You're still kinda missing the point or you didn't read it. The legislation is projected to pay for itself or come close. If you only take into consideration outlays and spending and don't factor in revenue and savings well, of course, it appears to explode the deficit.

It doesn’t include the Medicare cuts, or many of the tax increases, that pay for the legislation. [B]“CBO and JCT have previously estimated that the ACA will, on net, reduce budget deficits over the 2012–2021 period; that estimate of the overall budgetary impact of the ACA has not been updated.”[/B]

The bottom line is this, CBO will roll out more concrete deficit reduction numbers at some point in the future. I imagine more than once. Each year a new projection is done the legislation tends to cost a little more...and save more.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

One more thing SS33, your $700B estimate is looking at a different time frame when the law was originally passed. The first two years of it didn't cost much because there wasn't much implementation. The new estimates cover 2011-2012.

On a side note every year it costs more to repeal the law, which explodes the deficit. CBO says repeal would costs $230 billion. Basically Republicans are full of shit when they say repeal and replace.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

Its really comical to hear the GOP talk about how they will cut taxes, increase defense spending, increase Medicare/Medicaid spending and reduce the deficit. If they can do that and get a better cbo score I will be the first to vote republican every election.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;923298][quote=Giantone;923279]Rationing happens in other countries with socialized medicine, why won't it happen here?

[URL="http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mike-sargent/2009/07/06/what-cnn-didnt-ask-about-canada-health-care-rationing"]What CNN Didn't Ask About Canada Health Care Rationing | NewsBusters.org[/URL]

[URL="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124451570546396929.html"]Canada's ObamaCare Precedent - WSJ.com[/URL]

Even the Physicians for National Health agree their will be rationing. Check out the FAQ question on "will there be rationing".
[URL="http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single-payer-faq#rationing"]Single-Payer FAQ | Physicians for a National Health Program[/URL]

It's common knowledge that UK and Canada for example set an amount the gov't will pay for healthcare, then it works to stay within that amount....how can rationing not happen in that environment?[/quote]






Doctors will still be making money,very,very ,very good money.Sammy CNN,really,I would'nt quote them from now on...according to them the healthcare Law was shot down!Remeber this is still a matter of choice and you can get whatever it is you need done wherever you want it done,you keep saying the UK and Canada........well we ain't them.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=12thMan;923310]One more thing SS33, your $700B estimate is looking at a different time frame when the law was originally passed. The first two years of it didn't cost much because there wasn't much implementation. The new estimates cover 2011-2012.

On a side note every year it costs more to repeal the law, which explodes the deficit. CBO says repeal would costs $230 billion. Basically Republicans are full of shit when they say repeal and replace.[/quote]



.........this.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=12thMan;923308]You're still kinda missing the point or you didn't read it. The legislation is projected to pay for itself or come close. If you only take into consideration outlays and spending and don't factor in revenue and savings well, of course, it appears to explode the deficit.

It doesn’t include the Medicare cuts, or many of the tax increases, that pay for the legislation. [B]“CBO and JCT have previously estimated that the ACA will, on net, reduce budget deficits over the 2012–2021 period; that estimate of the overall budgetary impact of the ACA has not been updated.”[/B]

The bottom line is this, CBO will roll out more concrete deficit reduction numbers at some point in the future. I imagine more than once. Each year a new projection is done the legislation tends to cost a little more...and save more.[/quote]

Yea right, please name a major federal program that has not run way over its projected cost when it became law.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=firstdown;923409]Yea right, please name a major federal program that has not run way over its projected cost when it became law.[/quote]

Got me there. But given that healthcare represents 17% of GDP, it's the one that has the biggest drain on the economy, doing nothing and repeal this and repeal that isn't an option any longer.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=12thMan;923410]Got me there. But given that healthcare represents 17% of GDP, it's the one that has the biggest drain on the economy, doing nothing and repeal this and repeal that isn't an option any longer.[/quote]

Not sure if I would say its a total drain. Isn't that 17% of GDP going back into the system one way or another. Medical providers, hospitals, medical equipment, nurses, ambulance, construction, etc... make a living of medical cost and that 17%. I agree we need to cut cost but this is not the way.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

This is absolutely the way. We have more waste, fraud and abuse within our healthcare system than any other. We spend more on healthcare than any other industrialized nation. It's really now or never. That repeal bullshit is for the birds.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=12thMan;923440]This is absolutely the way. We have more waste, fraud and abuse within our healthcare system than any other. We spend more on healthcare than any other industrialized nation. It's really now or never. That repeal bullshit is for the birds.[/quote]

How come the right fails to look at the waste, fraud and mismanagement in the DoD? This is latest from them:

Again in 2011, the GAO could not "render an opinion on the 2011 consolidated financial statements of the federal government", with a major obstacle again being "serious financial management problems at the Department of Defense (DOD) that made its financial statements unauditable".[19]

In December 2011, the GAO found that "neither the Navy nor the Marine Corps have implemented effective processes for reconciling their FBWT." According to the GAO, "An agency’s FBWT account is similar in concept to a corporate bank account. The difference is that instead of a cash balance, FBWT represents unexpended spending authority in appropriations." In addition, "As of April 2011, there were more than $22 billion unmatched disbursements and collections affecting more than 10,000 lines of accounting."[20]

So how come we are good with this? Cut the pentagon's budget from ear to ear until we can at least get an audit of there expendures. As a citizen im outraged by this, why arent others?

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

Naw, they're just concerned with ObamaScare and delusional talking points.

Mind you Obamacare was oringially conceived by Republicans, instituted by the Republican nominee, and upheld by a Republican Supreme Court Justice. So much for socialism I guess.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=12thMan;923461]Naw, they're just concerned with ObamaScare and delusional talking points.

Mind you Obamacare was oringially conceived by Republicans, instituted by the Republican nominee, and upheld by a Republican Supreme Court Justice. So much for socialism I guess.[/quote]

I think what gets lost in the argument is the fact that both sides agree that something needs to be done to curve the rising costs of healthcare insurance. However, anytime the government steps in and takes something over means more tax dollars coming out of all of our pockets. The logic of it all is that if ONLY those who do not have health insurance are "taxed" to get on this program, how in the world is that going to be enough to support this program? I can't see it being enough to pay for all types of healthcare needed.

Also, speaking from experience, any time a healthcare agency deals with state money, their reimbursement is not nearly as quick as it is dealing with private insurance. It can take up to six months, sometimes longer to get reimbursement back. The argument that someone else had the other day was, "at least the health agency is getting reimbursed" but that argument fails when you consider that the health agency has to have money coming in every month to maintain its day to day operations, purchase supplies, pay its employees, etc...I hope you guys keep in mind that the same issues will take place when these health agencies are waiting for this government reimbursement. I work for a mental health agency, and 70% of our money comes from medicaid and medicare, while the other percentage comes from private insurance and self pay. When your payer source is a governmental payer, then you have to deal with the government approving/or denying the health services rendered. To assume this wouldn't happen in the medical health field as much as it does the mental health field is being quite ignorant to the way in which government interference works when it comes to healthcare.

I hate to say it, but too often, the American people only take a small portion of something instead of looking at all of the components. I'm all for everyone having affordable health insurance, but I'm also for everyone having access to that health service without some government no-name approval of that service.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=skinsguy;923467]I think what gets lost in the argument is the fact that both sides agree that something needs to be done to curve the rising costs of healthcare insurance. However, anytime the government steps in and takes something over means more tax dollars coming out of all of our pockets. The logic of it all is that if ONLY those who do not have health insurance are "taxed" to get on this program, how in the world is that going to be enough to support this program? I can't see it being enough to pay for all types of healthcare needed.

Also, speaking from experience, any time a healthcare agency deals with state money, their reimbursement is not nearly as quick as it is dealing with private insurance. It can take up to six months, sometimes longer to get reimbursement back. The argument that someone else had the other day was, "at least the health agency is getting reimbursed" but that argument fails when you consider that the health agency has to have money coming in every month to maintain its day to day operations, purchase supplies, pay its employees, etc...I hope you guys keep in mind that the same issues will take place when these health agencies are waiting for this government reimbursement. I work for a mental health agency, and 70% of our money comes from medicaid and medicare, while the other percentage comes from private insurance and self pay. When your payer source is a governmental payer, then you have to deal with the government approving/or denying the health services rendered. To assume this wouldn't happen in the medical health field as much as it does the mental health field is being quite ignorant to the way in which government interference works when it comes to healthcare.

I hate to say it, but too often, the American people only take a small portion of something instead of looking at all of the components. I'm all for everyone having affordable health insurance, but I'm also for everyone having access to that health service without some government no-name approval of that service.[/quote]

Please correct me if I was wrong -- but this is forcing insurance companies to cover everyone -- but along with that, forcing everyone to buy insurance. While the government is mandating it, they won't be 'running' it directly. Most government interactions will be between the government and the insurance agency, not the gov't and consumer and/or provider. If that is wrong, please point me in the right direction.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=Daseal;923469]Please correct me if I was wrong -- but this is forcing insurance companies to cover everyone -- but along with that, forcing everyone to buy insurance. While the government is mandating it, they won't be 'running' it directly. Most government interactions will be between the government and the insurance agency, not the gov't and consumer and/or provider. If that is wrong, please point me in the right direction.[/quote]

That's the gist it. To put a fine point on it, the law now requires insures to end discriminating based on gender, they can no longer deny coverage to kids based on pre-existing conditions, or drop coverage based on sudden illness. It also eliminates lifetime cap limits on patients.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

Daseal, the mandate really applies to the 30 million uninsured Americans with legal status.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pWQ2oi-LfM&feature=player_embedded]Busted: Audio of Obama Lawyer Arguing Obamacare Is a Tax Stuns WH Chief of Staff Lew - YouTube[/ame]

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=Daseal;923469]Please correct me if I was wrong -- but this is forcing insurance companies to cover everyone -- but along with that, forcing everyone to buy insurance. While the government is mandating it, they won't be 'running' it directly. Most government interactions will be between the government and the insurance agency, not the gov't and consumer and/or provider. If that is wrong, please point me in the right direction.[/quote]

That's only part of it:

[I]For people who can't afford health insurance, [B]the Federal government will pay the states to add them to Medicaid.[/B] The income requirement will be expanded to include more of the working poor.[/I]
[B]Those who don't qualify for the expanded Medicaid will receive tax credits. States will be required to set up insurance exchanges to make it easier to shop for private health insurance coverage.[/B]

You're still going to have several million more people going on medicaid instead of purchasing private health insurance - which means rising taxes on everyone to help shoulder the burden of the cost. I think it remains to be seen just how lower premiums could and will be with more people paying into the private health insurance companies. That I cannot argue for or against until I actually see it put into motion, but my earlier argument would still remain the same; health agencies still having to deal with a long wait period on reimbursement by medicaid, and I could possibly understand an even lengthier wait when adding millions more onto the program.

However, my personal opinion, I do see some good points from Obamacare, although some of it is kind of a wait and see approach. I can understand that subsidizing health insurance enough so that many more could afford to pay the premiums could help lower the premiums. That's basically how it's set up in many workplaces - more employees who are on the company insurance plan, the lower the rates ---- I just wished it was THAT easy though! You also have to consider the flipside - the more people on the insurance, the more claims, which often averages in higher insurance premiums the next year.

I do like the idea of being able to keep children on your insurance plan until they're 26. Seems like more and more kids are graduating college around that age because they're either in grad school or they have had to take a bit longer to get through their schooling. The upside is that I'm assuming parents would still get to possibly claim those children as dependents (although I could be very wrong on that one)?

Lastly, I do like the idea of who are falling into that "doughnut hole" of medicare being able to be covered. That happened to my mother, and I think she has skipped a lot of healthcare that she needed to be on because of not being covered.

Overall though, if the argument is that the right does not have a better plan to put in its place, it's because the right is thinking more in terms of job creation and getting folks back to work - at least that's the claims from the Romney camp. Whether if that comes to fruition or not would remain to be seen, but having people working is ultimately the best solution to a lot of this economic stuff that the government keeps jumping into.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=12thMan;923248]Also, you say that $500B in new taxes on ALL Americans. Well that's not true either. Without even breaking out the calculator the law doesn't affect ALL Americans, so how could it jack up taxes on ALL Americans?
[/quote]Some taxes from Obamacare that affect ALL Americans:

[URL="http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/07/05/five-major-obamacare-taxes-that-will-hit-your-wallet-in-2013/"]Five major ObamaCare taxes that will hit your wallet in 2013 | Fox News[/URL]

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[IMG]http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y7/leedogg/548304_10150882631811862_430996128_n.jpg[/IMG]

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;923681]Some taxes from Obamacare that affect ALL Americans:

[URL="http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/07/05/five-major-obamacare-taxes-that-will-hit-your-wallet-in-2013/"]Five major ObamaCare taxes that will hit your wallet in 2013 | Fox News[/URL][/quote]

Dear god. Fox news again? Sammy, for the love of god stop reading that crap.

As usual, they distort and exaggerate the truth. Let's start with that first point.

[quote]1. The ObamaCare Medical Device Manufacturing Tax

This 2.3 percent tax on medical device makers will raise the price of (for example) every pacemaker, prosthetic limb, stent, and operating table. Can you remind us, Mr. President, how taxing medical devices will reduce the cost of health care? The tax is particularly destructive because it is levied on gross sales and even targets companies who haven’t turned a profit yet.

These are often small, scrappy companies with less than 20 employees who pioneer the next generation of life-prolonging devices. In addition to raising the cost of health care, this $20 billion tax over the next ten years will not help the country’s jobs outlook, as the industry employs nearly 400,000 Americans. Several companies have already responded to the looming tax by cutting research and development budgets and laying off workers.

Read more: [url=http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/07/05/five-major-obamacare-taxes-that-will-hit-your-wallet-in-2013/#ixzz1zxhkmzlt]Five major ObamaCare taxes that will hit your wallet in 2013 | Fox News[/url]
[/quote]


[url=http://www.plasticstoday.com/blogs/medical-musings-look-beyond-hyperbole-medical-device-tax07070201201]Plastics Today[/url]

[quote]An article authored by Paul N. Van de Water states: "The House will soon consider legislation to repeal the excise tax on medical devices that was enacted to help pay for health reform. The provision is sound, however, and the [U]industry lobbying campaign aimed at repealing it is based on misinformation and exaggeration[/U]."

In a head-on attack on the main industry criticisms of the tax, Van de Water says: "The tax will not cause manufacturers to shift production overseas. The tax applies equally to imported and domestically produced devices, and devices produced in the United States for export are tax-exempt. The tax will have little effect on innovation in the medical device industry. To the contrary, health reform may well spur medical device innovation by promoting more cost-effective ways of delivering care."[/quote]


[url=http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3684]Excise Tax on Medical Devices Should Not Be Repealed — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities[/url]

^^I suggest you all read that article in regards to the Medical Excise Tax.



At this point, Fox News should be treated much like The Onion when it comes to stories.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

Seriously, the Fox talking points have got to stop.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=12thMan;923310]One more thing SS33, your $700B estimate is looking at a different time frame when the law was originally passed. The first two years of it didn't cost much because there wasn't much implementation. The new estimates cover 2011-2012.

On a side note every year it costs more to repeal the law, which explodes the deficit. CBO says repeal would costs $230 billion. Basically Republicans are full of shit when they say repeal and replace.[/quote]I think the repeal cost is based on going with (Obamacare + taxes) vs. projected costs going back to the old system. I don't think the CBO number refers to what Republicans are proposing at all. So how can you say the Repubs are full of **** in this case?

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=NC_Skins;923803]snip[/quote]Those links really don't support your own positions very much:

From your own links:
[URL="http://www.plasticstoday.com/blogs/medical-musings-look-beyond-hyperbole-medical-device-tax07070201201"]
All of that being said, there is room for improvement in how the medical device tax is assessed. Small companies that are often engines for important innovations need more protection from the tax. Any potential impact of the tax on R&D in the United States needs to be rethought and changed. Medical innovation is a powerful resource of the United States and a growing pillar of our economy.

Subsequent to posting this article, Thomas C. Novelli, VP Government Affairs of the Medical Device Manufacturers Association, pointed out to me: "There is no tiered-approach to the device tax and the tax applies to companies regardless to revenue. And since this tax is based purely on revenue, the smaller companies (which constitutes the majority of the industry) will bear the brunt of the tax. Many of these companies are either not profitable or have a very low profit margin. Both the Bloomberg article, and the corresponding articles that cite the Bloomberg article (including the CBPP) fail to consider this reality."[/URL]

and

[URL="http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3684"]Tax Will Have Minimal Effect on Consumers

The effect of the excise tax on consumers’ costs for health care and health insurance will be minimal and will be swamped by other factors. Spending on taxable medical devices represents less than 1 percent of total personal health expenditures, so a small increase in their price would have an almost imperceptible effect on health insurance premiums.[/URL]

"Swamped by other factors". Not very comforting. Especially since we all know out premiums are indeed going up, for all the "concessions" made by the health care industry to cover more people.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=HailGreen28;923859]I think the repeal cost is based on going with (Obamacare + taxes) vs. projected costs going back to the old system. I don't think the CBO number refers to what Republicans are proposing at all. So how can you say the Repubs are full of **** in this case?[/quote]

The latter part of your statement, Republicans have neither set forth a proposal for how they plan to repeal the law nor one to replace it. Frankly they're full of shit because Obamacare is a Republican model. If they've abandoned their own idea, one that originated at a Republican think tank, what do you suppose they plan to replace the law with? They aren't that's what.

They're full of it.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=12thMan;923863]The latter part of your statement, Republicans have neither set forth a proposal for how they plan to repeal the law nor one to replace it. Frankly they're full of shit because Obamacare is a Republican model. [B]If they've abandoned their own idea, one that originated at a Republican think tank, what do you suppose they plan to replace the law with? They aren't that's what. [/B]

They're full of it.[/quote]

Maybe they just realized it was a bad idea.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=firstdown;923883]Maybe they just realized it was a bad idea.[/quote]


maybe, or maybe they realize they should have done it first.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=NC_Skins;923801][IMG]http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y7/leedogg/548304_10150882631811862_430996128_n.jpg[/IMG][/quote]

So now health insurance will reduce crime and homelessness. LMAO

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=firstdown;923951]So now health insurance will reduce crime and homelessness. LMAO[/quote]

We don't know, we've never had full coverage for everyone until now. Maybe it will.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=firstdown;923951]So now health insurance will reduce crime and homelessness. LMAO[/quote]

great point about Christian values. lotta hypocracy on the right when it comes to that.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=firstdown;923883]Maybe they just realized it was a bad idea.[/quote]

No, it's not a bad idea.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=firstdown;923883]Maybe they just realized it was a bad idea.[/quote]

The role of a government is to solve problems faced by its people. Sometimes solutions are less than optimal and sometimes they aren't solutions at all. Rarely is it possible to have a perfect solution or do nothing as a solution. Obamacare solves a problem faced by a great deal of Americans and if you have a better idea you are welcome to share it. Saying it's a bad idea and pointing to faults here and there without having an alternative solution to the problem won't cut it.

This is something "conservatives" use to understand when they conceived of Obamacare but now they have to pander to goofy [URL="http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/judge_posner_hits_goofy_trend_in_gop_says_hes_becoming_less_conservative/"]people who refuse to think[/URL].

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

Well said.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=Chico23231;923958]great point about Christian values. lotta hypocracy on the right when it comes to that.[/quote]

His points were pretty stupid if you ask me. I see churches helping people all the time out of kindness not being forced to by a federal gov. I guess the left needs to be forced to help the poor by taking money from other people.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=saden1;923997][B]The role of a government is to solve problems faced by its people.[/B] Sometimes solutions are less than optimal and sometimes they aren't solutions at all. Rarely is it possible to have a perfect solution or do nothing as a solution. Obamacare solves a problem faced by a great deal of Americans and if you have a better idea you are welcome to share it. Saying it's a bad idea and pointing to faults here and there without having an alternative solution to the problem won't cut it.

This is something "conservatives" use to understand when they conceived of Obamacare but now they have to pander to goofy [URL="http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/judge_posner_hits_goofy_trend_in_gop_says_hes_becoming_less_conservative/"]people who refuse to think[/URL].[/quote]

That's what the left thinks.

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

[quote=firstdown;924020]That's what the left thinks.[/quote]

When did you become a degenerate old man? Or have you yet to realize what you have become?

Re: Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate
 

It's weird that people have this absolutist thinking when it comes to government. It's scary and, frankly, destructive.

We don't throw out capitalism when corporations fail or turn out to be corrupt and inefficient. The same should be true of government. No program or agency is without flaw or room for improvement.