Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Cancer Patients are losing their health insurance because of Obamacare
Topic Started: Dec 12 2013, 01:04 AM (4,060 Views)
Plus 1

Snidely, well my oh my! We disagreed and had an exchange of thoughts, facts, ideas, and opinions without name calling or insults!

I do declare, it was fun and informative. :-)

I'll respond to your post soon.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Whozthatgurl
Member Avatar
#ITISWHATITIS
Snidely Whiplash
Mar 22 2014, 04:02 PM
Plus 1
Mar 22 2014, 02:48 PM
There are positive stories for people who are using the Health Care Act. Some media never reports it, such a shame.
Sure there are some positive stories. Despite some bad things pre-obamacare, most americans were happy with their coverage and their healthcare. Heck, there are positive stories about WWII too.

The bottom line is Americans oppose obamacare. It's been that way since day 1. Insurance rates are expected to double and triple in many areas. And there are the whole litany of issues with Obama's health insurance bailout that's been mentioned many times here. Regardless of where you side on the rhetoric, people are now experiencing obamacare. The 2014 elections will show how Americans feel about obamacare, and the politicians who supported it will be affected by their support of it.

Also Snidely you refuse to admit that the republicans themselves haven't brought anything to the health care debate knowing full well that this could be a potential security threat for a future America because a lot of the countries resources would have to go to taking care of a sick American population.
Most people were happy with their coverage because they didn't know any better.

You refuse to believe that there are people out there that were being screwed by the insurance companies.

You refuse to believe that there were people who had pre-existing conditions like Cancer who could not get health insurance.

You refuse to believe that there were people who did have the health plan coverage "THAT THEY LIKED" and lets say ended up getting cancer, and found out later that there were areas of their treatment that was capped and then they had to pay the rest out of their pockets.

You refuse to believe that there are people who JUST DON'T WANT TO GET MEDICAL INSURANCE, but rather spend their money on other frivolous things, but will milk the free healthcare system that do exist if they need medical care.

Which leads me to the question for Republicans who REFUSE to come up with a resolution for the scenerio of "IF AN UNINSURED PERSON FINDS THEMSELF IN A LIFE THEATNING HEALTH SITUATION AND THEY NEED LONG TERM MEDICAL CARE, WHO SHOULD PAY FOR IT?"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Snidely Whiplash
Member Avatar

Plus 1
Mar 23 2014, 03:40 AM
Snidely, well my oh my! We disagreed and had an exchange of thoughts, facts, ideas, and opinions without name calling or insults!

I do declare, it was fun and informative. :-)

I'll respond to your post soon.
Well, I'm glad I was able to inform.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Snidely Whiplash
Member Avatar

Whozthatgurl
Mar 23 2014, 12:39 PM
Snidely Whiplash
Mar 22 2014, 04:02 PM
Plus 1
Mar 22 2014, 02:48 PM
There are positive stories for people who are using the Health Care Act. Some media never reports it, such a shame.
Sure there are some positive stories. Despite some bad things pre-obamacare, most americans were happy with their coverage and their healthcare. Heck, there are positive stories about WWII too.

The bottom line is Americans oppose obamacare. It's been that way since day 1. Insurance rates are expected to double and triple in many areas. And there are the whole litany of issues with Obama's health insurance bailout that's been mentioned many times here. Regardless of where you side on the rhetoric, people are now experiencing obamacare. The 2014 elections will show how Americans feel about obamacare, and the politicians who supported it will be affected by their support of it.

Also Snidely you refuse to admit that the republicans themselves haven't brought anything to the health care debate knowing full well that this could be a potential security threat for a future America because a lot of the countries resources would have to go to taking care of a sick American population.
Most people were happy with their coverage because they didn't know any better.

You refuse to believe that there are people out there that were being screwed by the insurance companies.

You refuse to believe that there were people who had pre-existing conditions like Cancer who could not get health insurance.

You refuse to believe that there were people who did have the health plan coverage "THAT THEY LIKED" and lets say ended up getting cancer, and found out later that there were areas of their treatment that was capped and then they had to pay the rest out of their pockets.

You refuse to believe that there are people who JUST DON'T WANT TO GET MEDICAL INSURANCE, but rather spend their money on other frivolous things, but will milk the free healthcare system that do exist if they need medical care.

Which leads me to the question for Republicans who REFUSE to come up with a resolution for the scenerio of "IF AN UNINSURED PERSON FINDS THEMSELF IN A LIFE THEATNING HEALTH SITUATION AND THEY NEED LONG TERM MEDICAL CARE, WHO SHOULD PAY FOR IT?"
Quote:
 
Most people were happy with their coverage because they didn't know any better.

And this is the problem I, many leftist like me, and the majority of the population has with dems and the corporate repubs. Dictating sons of bitches telling us what's good for us. This is the US. Not the old Soviet Union or North Korea.

Quote:
 
You refuse to believe that there are people out there that were being screwed by the insurance companies.

And the best way to fix that is to mandate people buy from these insurance companies? Really! I know you're a 'bot but try to use the few brain cells not corrupted by Obama.
Tell ya what. Remember, it was obama who criticized the very insurance he and the dems imposed when it was Hillary's plan. I know you wont listen to me but I know you hang on his every word.

Quote:
 
You refuse to believe that there were people who had pre-existing conditions like Cancer who could not get health insurance

Did you just happen to gloss over the topic of this thread?
Are you ignoring the HIPAA law passed by Clinton? Granted it was poorly enforced but the law already there.

Quote:
 
You refuse to believe that there were people who did have the health plan coverage "THAT THEY LIKED" and lets say ended up getting cancer, and found out later that there were areas of their treatment that was capped and then they had to pay the rest out of their pockets.

Again, read this thread.
I'm not saying all was perfect pre-obamacare but you are under some delusion that with Obama waving hi magic wand all is perfect now.

Quote:
 
You refuse to believe that there are people who JUST DON'T WANT TO GET MEDICAL INSURANCE, but rather spend their money on other frivolous things, but will milk the free healthcare system that do exist if they need medical care.

So we need our lords and masters to dictate to us what we buy. That whole land of the free thingy is so much antiquated rubbish. The Soviets and North Koreans had/have it right. The masses need to be controlled.
Say what you want about Bush, when the public opposed his privatization attempt at Social Security, he backed off. Not this current son of a bitch in the white house though. Mr Constitutional scholar!

Quote:
 
Which leads me to the question for Republicans who REFUSE to come up with a resolution for the scenerio of "IF AN UNINSURED PERSON FINDS THEMSELF IN A LIFE THEATNING HEALTH SITUATION AND THEY NEED LONG TERM MEDICAL CARE, WHO SHOULD PAY FOR IT?"

Perhaps you should google republican proposals.
Keep in mind that the GAO predicts that at the end of the day, there will still be ~30 million uninsured under obamacrap. The very thing Obama sold this thing on remains unresolved in typical Obama fashion. The question now for you clapping seals is, IF AN UNINSURED PERSON FINDS THEMSELF IN A LIFE THEATNING HEALTH SITUATION AND THEY NEED LONG TERM MEDICAL CARE, WHO SHOULD PAY FOR IT?
Edited by Snidely Whiplash, Mar 23 2014, 03:41 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Plus 1

Why and how did the HIPPA law signed in by Clinton become lazy to enforce? Was this on a federal level, state level, due to interest groups supporting the corporations / insurance companies?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Snidely Whiplash
Member Avatar

Plus 1
Mar 23 2014, 06:12 PM
Why and how did the HIPPA law signed in by Clinton become lazy to enforce? Was this on a federal level, state level, due to interest groups supporting the corporations / insurance companies?
Speculation here on my part but I suspect what you mentioned, the result of interests groups like the insurance companies.
Since this was a federal, it would have definitely fallen under the jurisdiction of the US attorney general.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Plus 1

Snidely, an honest non rhetorical question here,

Which is better? To fix Obama Care or repeal it?

And why?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Snidely Whiplash
Member Avatar

Plus 1
Mar 24 2014, 09:35 PM
Snidely, an honest non rhetorical question here,

Which is better? To fix Obama Care or repeal it?

And why?
Repeal, easily.

1 - No one should be mandated in a so-called free nation to buy anything from the private sector. Period!

2 - These dems don't even know what they passed. As Pelosi said, you have to pass the bill to find out what's in it! What the fuck is that!

3 - The cost is out of control. Obamacare had little to no cost containment.

4 - It has the net effect of reducing the standard of living. In the link below, a union that supported Obama and obamacare said it would reduce the salaries of their members up $5/hr. We are talking low wage workers here.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/union-obamacare-will-slash-wages-by-up-to-5-an-hour/article/2545310

“Believe me; I enter this entire debate about the consequences of the ACA with a deep reluctance,” he wrote. “Unite Here was the first union to endorse then-Senator Obama. We support the addition of health care to millions of Americans. Yet facts are facts, and Obamacare will cost our members the equivalent of a significant pay cut to keep their hard-won benefits.”

5 - By repealing it, at worse we'll be back to where we were which is still better than obamacare.
The one true benefit of obamacare, keeping kids on a parent's ins till 26 is something the ins companies can do easily. They metioned it when there was some uncertainty which way the court would go.
I'm sure when they looked at risk for insuring the young, it was minimal compared to older people and they groomed a future customer. From a business standpoint it's like vegas hotels giving you free drinks in their casinos. The gambler will spend far more than the cost of the alcohol.

6 - And perhaps most importantly, we should NOT leave a legacy of less freedom to the next generation. Isn't it ironic that a so-called black president reduces freedoms via threats from the IRS to buy something from the private sector. This is fundamentally wrong!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Plus 1

Snidely Whiplash
Mar 25 2014, 02:33 AM
Plus 1
Mar 24 2014, 09:35 PM
Snidely, an honest non rhetorical question here,

Which is better? To fix Obama Care or repeal it?

And why?
Repeal, easily.

1 - No one should be mandated in a so-called free nation to buy anything from the private sector. Period!

2 - These dems don't even know what they passed. As Pelosi said, you have to pass the bill to find out what's in it! What the fuck is that!

3 - The cost is out of control. Obamacare had little to no cost containment.

4 - It has the net effect of reducing the standard of living. In the link below, a union that supported Obama and obamacare said it would reduce the salaries of their members up $5/hr. We are talking low wage workers here.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/union-obamacare-will-slash-wages-by-up-to-5-an-hour/article/2545310

“Believe me; I enter this entire debate about the consequences of the ACA with a deep reluctance,” he wrote. “Unite Here was the first union to endorse then-Senator Obama. We support the addition of health care to millions of Americans. Yet facts are facts, and Obamacare will cost our members the equivalent of a significant pay cut to keep their hard-won benefits.”

5 - By repealing it, at worse we'll be back to where we were which is still better than obamacare.
The one true benefit of obamacare, keeping kids on a parent's ins till 26 is something the ins companies can do easily. They metioned it when there was some uncertainty which way the court would go.
I'm sure when they looked at risk for insuring the young, it was minimal compared to older people and they groomed a future customer. From a business standpoint it's like vegas hotels giving you free drinks in their casinos. The gambler will spend far more than the cost of the alcohol.

6 - And perhaps most importantly, we should NOT leave a legacy of less freedom to the next generation. Isn't it ironic that a so-called black president reduces freedoms via threats from the IRS to buy something from the private sector. This is fundamentally wrong!
Soon, I will give you a proper response. :-)
Edited by Plus 1, Mar 25 2014, 09:36 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DeShawn

Plus 1
Mar 24 2014, 09:35 PM
Snidely, an honest non rhetorical question here,

Which is better? To fix Obama Care or repeal it?

And why?
Repeal it, because in every single poll for the last 4 years Americans say that they don't like it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics & Government · Next Topic »
Add Reply