Forced health care mandate in Obamacare struck down in court

[Pert]

Why would you have much longer of a wait than now? There's no problem offering both a public and private option, there would in fact be more chances at healthcare now. As for rationed care, that's an obnoxious myth, alot of fox media tried to say that people would get euthanized/ and that the younger would get organs.. to bad that's not how it works at all.

Government healthcare means everyone pays the same. Even moreso, it means every doctor is paid the same. So, for example, why should a good doctor set up a practice in your city when he could draw the same salary elsewhere? It removes profit incentive. it also limits the care you can receive to what the government is willing to pay for.

People throw around the word "option" like the goal isn't government mandated healthcare.

[Sunseeker]

Yeah, covered... if you're interested in a long wait and rationed care.

I already have to make dental checkups over 6 months in advance with a PRIVATE dentist and PRIVATE insurance. Don't gimme crap about "waits" in public healthcare, besides, last time I went to an emergency room I waited for over 3 hours before they'd even talk to me. Were they busy helping other people? Fuck no. They were bitchy secretaries who were filling out paperwork while they told people to sit down and shut up.

i'm sorry, but you are blowing that way out of proportion. even living in New York, Los Angeles, or Tokyo.. some of the most expensive cities in the world to live in. with 100k a year you would not be living like dirt. you wouldn't be living like royalty either, but you would definitely be middle class. i have never heard of anyone anywhere making 100k a year being considered dirt poor.

I just picked a number and the number isn't important. My point is the government can't abstractly draw a line in the sand and say "X has to pay insurance while Y doesn't", because two people living under X could be at drastically different lifestyle levels.

---------- Post added 2011-08-12 at 01:45 PM ----------

Even moreso, it means every doctor is paid the same.

No it doesn't. He gets paid on the basis of the people he sees. More people=more money. Bigger procedures=more money.

[xile]

Government healthcare means everyone pays the same. Even moreso, it means every doctor is paid the same. So, for example, why should a good doctor set up a practice in your city when he could draw the same salary elsewhere? It removes profit incentive. it also limits the care you can receive to what the government is willing to pay for.

Congrats, you just compared the combination of the public and private option to full out communism. Those two are entirely different, i suggest you look it up. A public option doesn't mean that everyone gets paid the same at all.

---------- Post added 2011-08-12 at 08:51 PM ----------

I just picked a number and the number isn't important. My point is the government can't abstractly draw a line in the sand and say "X has to pay insurance while Y doesn't", because two people living under X could be at drastically different lifestyle levels..

In that situation like i said it would be ideal (this obviously isn't the case) to have a sort of formula to measure who and who can not afford the health insurance, and who can pay for the healthcare by themselves.

[Firehorse]

I'm not sure how a country that has had a trade deficit since 79 deserves a AAA rating, but that's neither here nor there.

I was more speaking to the argument that's made that government is too big to be involved in healthcare, and will be inefficient, dragging down the economy. While the point doesn't imply causation, there is an obvious correlation between a more hands on approach to certain aspects of life by the government and a strong economy.

Administrative costs accounts for less than 3% of the operating costs of medicare, whereas most major insurance company's administrative costs are around 12-16%, I would say the government does a pretty good job at staying efficient compared to there "free market" competitors while being the only cross state insurance provider.

Would you be for a private security force/ and fire force in your town? I'm sure there are plenty of citizens who don't want to pay for police protection but we are forced to because of the greater good it provides the community. How would you feel if you had fire insurance but the guy next to you didn't, so when his house catches on fire the fire crew won't do anything about it till it spreads to your house because he doesn't have insurance. Just because you don't want to help pay for the construction work down the street to go see a doctor doesn't mean he can't give you or your kids meningitis at the next block party.

[Dacien]

have you been to an emergency room lately? it's been a long wait and rationed care unless you are two seconds from death for a long time.

---------- Post added 2011-08-12 at 08:40 PM ----------

who would want to attack canada? they don't go around the world telling other people to live a certain way or they will starve, bomb, shoot them.. not necessarily in that order.

We have a weak spot for genocidal dictators.

[Firehorse]

Government healthcare means everyone pays the same. Even moreso, it means every doctor is paid the same. So, for example, why should a good doctor set up a practice in your city when he could draw the same salary elsewhere? It removes profit incentive. it also limits the care you can receive to what the government is willing to pay for.

People throw around the word "option" like the goal isn't government mandated healthcare.

....Where did you get this idea? As it stands right now most drs make around the same amount of money so I don't see that being a problem

In terms of care, most public health care systems give bonus's to drs who patients health improves(quit smoking, lowers bmi, better heart rate), so if anything you are gonna see better health care because the incentives for Doctors will be to make there panties healthier, rather than seeing as many of them as they humanly can in a shift.

[Pert]

I already have to make dental checkups over 6 months in advance with a PRIVATE dentist and PRIVATE insurance. Don't gimme crap about "waits" in public healthcare, besides, last time I went to an emergency room I waited for over 3 hours before they'd even talk to me. Were they busy helping other people? Fuck no. They were bitchy secretaries who were filling out paperwork while they told people to sit down and shut up.

So, essentially you think the waits stink, but you doubt that they could possibly get longer?

Heh.

Hehe.

Congrats, you just compared the combination of the public and private option to full out communism. Those two are entirely different, i suggest you look it up. A public option doesn't mean that everyone gets paid the same at all.

The government decides how much they're willing to pay. Doctors either accept it or don't participate.

Seems pretty straight-forward to me.

[Kuldrad]

I am well aware it is not invalidating the entire bill. This is the only part of the bill I personally really have a problem with. 2-1 is still struck down

And there is jail time associated with it; if you do not have it, and they fine you, you do not pay the fine, you got to jail.

Wrong. They just figure out a way to collect. You will never see jail time. Quit making things up.

[xile]

So, essentially you think the waits stink, but you doubt that they could possibly get longer?

Heh.

Hehe.



The government decides how much they're willing to pay. Doctors either accept it or don't participate.

Seems pretty straight-forward to me.

Say the government decides to pay doctors 10,000 a year. Guess what. Doctors don't work or better yet they go to work in the private sector. Your views try to compare the public option with communism and it isn't and all you're doing is attempting to spread misinformation. You lack no proof but an astonishing amount of opinionated misconceptions.

[Sunseeker]

So, essentially you think the waits stink, but you doubt that they could possibly get longer?

Laugh all you want, but until you can produce anything other than meager anecdotal evidence by people who don't think beyond their waistband, I'm going to stand by: waits fucking such and private coverage does all of shit to change that.

The government decides how much they're willing to pay. Doctors either accept it or don't participate.

Seems pretty straight-forward to me.

How much they pay, per head, per service. Fancy services make more money, more patients=more money. The fact that you don't get told until AFTER your procedure how much it's going to cost you is ridiculous to begin with.

And private surgeons can still run a variety of private medical services. You don't think people don't get boob jobs or tummy-tucks in Norway? Government doesn't cover that(save for the oddball medical reason).

[Wells]

Yeah, covered... if you're interested in a long wait and rationed care.

Care is rationed in our system too you know.

Yeah, I think all the money you save on National Defense frees up funds to be spent elsewhere. Not to worry though! If you get attacked, we're here to save you.

You know Canada has a military right? This is like the most derpy criticism of UHC ever.

[Kuldrad]

No, there wasn't. The Bill basically said "buy insurance from the government or someone else, or get fined for it and risk jail time." Mandating insurance is like mandating that everyone own sneakers. Most people may wear shoes, but some people like boots, heels, sandals, some people like walking around barefoot and all the risk that includes. Why should I be mandated to buy X kind of shoe when I don't want it?

You have contradicted yourself. You do not have to buy sneakers, but you do have to buy SHOES. Doesn't matter what kind of shoes, that's up to you, but you still need to buy shoes. If you can't afford the kind of shoes that you want, then we have these sneakers over here in a couple of different sizes and colors, and we won't won't charge you too much for them. They may not fit the way you wish, but at least you are still wearing shoes that you paid for.

We do not want you getting shoes that are paid for by other people anymore. It is costing them waaaayyyy too much to keep supplying all you barefoot people with free shoes. It is costing them even more to pay for free shoes for barefoot people that aren't even citizens. Talk to anyone from California, Texas or Arizona about that.

If you don't have shoes, then other people have to pay for your shoes, and we don't like that.

[Bacon Grease]

People being forced to have some type of health care....what a nightmare.....

*goes off and pays car insurance bill*

[Pert]

Say the government decides to pay doctors 10,000 a year. Guess what. Doctors don't work or better yet they go to work in the private sector. Your views try to compare the public option with communism and it isn't and all you're doing is attempting to spread misinformation. You lack no proof but an astonishing amount of opinionated misconceptions.

The government isn't going to pay doctors a yearly salary. That's not how it works. The government says "we will pay X dollars for y treatment" and the doctor says either "ok, that's cool" or "nope, not enough."

The end result is people using the "public option" don't have access to the best doctors or don't have access to the best care ("this treatment is the only one the government will pay for").

Sure, you may have a little bit of that going on now, but for some reason that doesn't compel me to throw away money on a public healthcare program, one which will undoubtedly hemorrhage money like every other government program.

Also, if you don't think mandatory healthcare isn't the eventual goal you're deluding yourself. Calling it an "option" is just shortsighted.

Laugh all you want, but until you can produce anything other than meager anecdotal evidence by people who don't think beyond their waistband, I'm going to stand by: waits fucking such and private coverage does all of shit to change that.

What do you want me to say? Traipse up to Canada. In a non-emergency situation you'll be waiting a lot longer there for public care than you would here for private care. Yeah the emergency room sucks, but that's basically a "public option." Anyone can walk in, and you all get treatment based on who's going to die first. Don't complain about it and then assert that its a failure of the private healthcare system.

[omglaserzpewpew]

Only in America are people mad that they have to have health insurance but okay with having car insurance mandated. Last time i checked they were also implementing programs to help pay those who can't afford to pay for the health insurance.

Car insurance is only mandated if you operate a motor vehicle. Surely you don't fail to see the difference here.

[Wells]

What do you want me to say? Traipse up to Canada. In a non-emergency situation you'll be waiting a lot longer there for public care than you would here for private care.

citation required.

---------- Post added 2011-08-12 at 09:29 PM ----------

Car insurance is only mandated if you operate a motor vehicle. Surely you don't fail to see the difference here.

For much of the US a car is required if you want to have a job or get food or anything.

[Merendel]

^this, uninsured people cost everyone else.

I'm uninsured and costing you nothing. I'm young healthy and the rare occasions I need medical help I pay for it out of my own pocket not yours. I find it rather offensive that many people wish to pay for their medical coverage out of my pocket.

And while I agree that this ruling only strikes down the individual mandate and not the whole law its only a matter of time. That mandate is a central pillar of the law, without it many other provisions either wont work or will be monetarily unsustainable without additional revenue from elsewhere. If the supreme court, when it eventually takes up this case, agrees with this ruling the whole law will likely colapse even if they do not strike down the remaining provisions of the law.

[Sunseeker]

You have contradicted yourself. You do not have to buy sneakers, but you do have to buy SHOES. Doesn't matter what kind of shoes, that's up to you, but you still need to buy shoes. If you can't afford the kind of shoes that you want, then we have these sneakers over here in a couple of different sizes and colors, and we won't won't charge you too much for them. They may not fit the way you wish, but at least you are still wearing shoes that you paid for.

We do not want you getting shoes that are paid for by other people anymore. It is costing them waaaayyyy too much to keep supplying all you barefoot people with free shoes. It is costing them even more to pay for free shoes for barefoot people that aren't even citizens. Talk to anyone from California, Texas or Arizona about that.

If you don't have shoes, then other people have to pay for your shoes, and we don't like that.

Shoes that don't protect my toes are a waste of money. Insurance does not cover EVERYTHING, there are so many loopholes in insurance programs it'll make your head spin. I don't think it's legal to force someone to pay for a product they don't want, that doesn't do the job it should, and isn't what they want. Shoes that don't fit right or don't do their job properly are going to cost ME more.

The ONLY reason there was a legal mandate was because insurance company lobbyists got the government to stick it in there.

[Bacon Grease]

Car insurance is only mandated if you operate a motor vehicle. Surely you don't fail to see the difference here.

If only the majority of US infrastructure wasn't based around owning a car....

There was a movement to introduce high-speed rails but..... we know how that's been turning out...

Some day the U.S. will catch up, and then your argument will be valid... until then cars are virtually mandatory.

[Wells]

I'm uninsured and costing you nothing. I'm young healthy and the rare occasions I need medical help I pay for it out of my own pocket not yours. I find it rather offensive that many people wish to pay for their medical coverage out of my pocket.

Personal anecdotes aside: statistics.