Healthy people can work. Employment-based health care is an bizarre abomination that came about via tax incentives during WWII and that no country would intentionally create for its health care system. The endgame is transitioning it to something that isn't a trainwreck.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Supreme Court to rule on healthcare law today [Update: Upheld whole law]
- Thread starter Ripclawe
- Start date
- Status
The Librarian
Banned
No, it is a hard stretch, because there hasn't been any polling to indicate that. I think you're confusing the average joe's dislike for the idea of the bill rather than what it contains.
This is one of the sad "liberal" faults- believing people are much more rational than they actually are.
it's not actual a 'liberal' fault - it's histories fault for showing that has been the case time after time
The way they do right now - through the ER's. Hospitals cannot turn away people in need of healthcare. ER's are horrible for healthcare, but they are there as a last resort. Everyone who is near a hospital has a basic level of healthcare, plus the free clinics, plus low cost health clinics. Half the Krogers in Lexington have the little physicians office that basically charge a little more than a copay for minor ailments.
That is certainly a legitimate option. Again, the worst case scenario is the ones who are silly enough to avoid getting healthcare at all costs will still get coverage. The main issue is whether they should financially suffer for it or not.
Like I said, they are my least worry.
Bitmap Frogs
Mr. Community
Because they are for profit entities!
The managers are paid more the less healthcare they provide!
greatestjediever
Member
I obviously don't mean we should actually do it. It's a rhetorical point to show that people would care if they actually understood what was at stake.
Rocket Scientist
Member
Dis gon' be gud.
The Chosen One
Member
I've been up all night working (West coast), should I stay up the extra hour to hear the ruling? Or will it still be a couple of hours from now until we hear the actual ruling? If it's still several hours away, I'm getting some shut eye and catch the circus already in progress 5 hours from now.
Well, the Supreme Court is pretty consistent about announcing rulings in the 9:30~11:00(EST) time frame
right after they build their high speed train with money they don't have
CrocMother
Banned
America needs some judicial activism right now.
We need that mandate.
We need that mandate.
el retorno
Member
Ok then I agree. The health care system is my biggest problem with my country. It scares the crap out of me.
You mean restraint?
The activist thing is overturning the mandate
It should be announced at 10:30 AM ET at the latest.
CrocMother
Banned
Yeah, sorry. It's just with the rhetoric floating around I tend to forget.
The bill will effect everyone. It will raise the overall cost of healthcare in the US. To think you can cover millions more as well as extend coverage of millions of others while reducing costs is simply naive. This money will come mostly from the young and healthy who will be forced to buy more coverage than they need. So it's a further burden on the younger generations to subsidize the older workers and retired. See also Social Security, Medicare etc.
Putting aside the sheer inefficiency, fraud and waste inherent in any program this size, sure it would be good to have more people covered. That doesnt mean this is the way to do it.
Putting aside the sheer inefficiency, fraud and waste inherent in any program this size, sure it would be good to have more people covered. That doesnt mean this is the way to do it.
lol internet)el retorno
Member
The Chosen One
Member
The Librarian
Banned
Today we find out people with government health care will decide if the American populace can or can't have their own.
IrishNinja
Member
True. In fact, financially, they're screwed over a flu if they can't pay bill. My point is if the mandate is dropped, they will be financially screwed and still receive care.
Honestly, they could just bite the bullet and insure the uninsured either by expanding the rules of Medicaid to include more people or going to a single payor right at the hospital where they can still negotiate the prices & coverage. That will add expense but, honestly, that really does not matter.
The Librarian
Banned
With the money saved from a single-payer system, they probably could.
Half and half
Member
It's called Individual Responsibility not mandate. The media likes to use the term mandate because it riles people up by making it sound like it's something it's not.
reggieandTFE
Member
You are exactly right. It's not like we can point to other countries with actual single-payer health instance programs that pay half as much per person while covering everyone in the country. Let talk out our ass about ridiculous generalities, complete bullshit and anti-government scare-mongering an ignore the statistics directly in front of our faces.
twinturbo2
butthurt Heat fan
I'm rooting for this whole thing to be overturned and for Obama to be reelected. Maybe then America will get single payer healthcare.
I had to switch my plan a few weeks ago to save some money. Never again, it was such a pain.
I had to switch my plan a few weeks ago to save some money. Never again, it was such a pain.
Dude Abides
Banned
If an announcement of an announcement like this is thread worthy, I don't see why that wouldn't be.
diffusionx
Gold Member
This law is probably the worst way to do 'universal' healthcare but covering more people doesn't necessarily mean a more expensive system in aggregate. For proof, look around the first world.
Also: "more coverage than they need" isn't a very useful phrase. People buy insurance to cover the unknown. I have life insurance even though the chances of me dying are very slight. You could even say that I have more life insurance than I need. I still carry it because I don't know what is around the corner.
That fit 23 year old gets into a car crash and needs $100,000 of care and makes $35,000 a year. He's not going to pay it and it's not realistic to ask him to be an indentured servant to the hospital his entire life. In reality he will declare bankruptcy (because he is bankrupt) and the government will end up paying the hospital anyway. You could say "we should just deny him care", but that's not realistic. That's not going to happen. It's a fantasy that gives libertarians a boner but that's all it is. If he is covered by a policy he is at least integrated into the risk pool and that is what is important.
edit: for what it's worth the private insurance system is way more inefficient than Medicare. I'm talking 3-5x more money lost in administration and expenses than Medicare. And Medicare is larger than any private insurance company. If this law gets overturned then Medicare For All is the goal. It's already a proven system, its constitutionality is unquestioned, and Medicare can be scaled up easily.
They aren't losing a lot of money on the pre-existing stuff though and they may have gained additonal revenue as they were denying dormant/benign stuff. Now they're collecting premiums on the basis of potential claims that may never occur.
Honestly, most of the healthcare mandate is the equivalent of forcing a kid to try eating a new food. Once they try it, it's not that bad. Our insurance guy for 2 years now has said that increases in premium are largely the result of things they were already covering and little had to do with reform. The increases have not been that bad either although that varies depending on how much an employer is willing to pay.
10:15 - 10:30 Eastern at the earliest, so you've got about an hour to go.
EYEL1NER
Member
As soon as I saw this thread I thought about making one for the Stolen Valor Act, since there are people on GAF who like to talk military (and people who love their 'announcement of a preview for the teaser trailer' threads), but the last thread I made had like 3 replies or something.
I figured I'd just bring it up in here but it's not the right place for it I suppose. I'll just wait 'till me buddy gets of work so we can debate it some more during the hour drive to Columbia tonight.
how is it not forcing people to pay for insurance again?
Anticitizen One
Banned
Scrap the current bill and give us single payer
LegendofJoe
Member
In that case I agree, not many people at the federal level will have the stones to touch healthcare.
Single payer insurance gives the government a degree of control over healthcare costs, this in and of itself will probably pay for the whole thing. The huge federal payout for Medicaid exansion that was included in the Healthcare act will also go a long way to helping CA pay for a single payer system.
Single payer health-insurance is not the black hole money sink it is made out to be. Lowering the amount of money spend on insurance will free up money that could be spend elsewhere, making it also serve the double purpose of stimulating the economy. Seriously, imagine the boon that would occur if everyone's wallets got 8% fatter. If done right that is what would happen if the government has the power to set healthcare prices.
Any estimate on the latest? I was hearing people yesterday say we would know around 9. Figures they would hold it to the last possible second.
Rocket Scientist
Member
I'm incredibly confused at intrade. How am I selling shares I don't own? How do I make money here?
Is that... verbatim?
greatestjediever
Member
To be honest, I didn't even realize there is an exemption for 'religious purposes'.
It doesn't force anyone to buy insurance. You can refuse to buy insurance for perpetuity. People who don't buy insurance have a higher tax burden, just like people who refuse to have children.
'Force' implies that something will happen to you if you do not buy insurance
Seriously if Obama wasn't so intent on killing our grandparents things could have went a lot smoother.
I think we know just about as much as everybody else now. Once it's inside the court all we can do is wait for the news to come out.
Almost exactly word for word how the start of the exchange went. He of course went on to clarify what he personally thinks Americans need, but that was the opening nearly word for word.
Pollux
Member
With Kennedy writing the Arizona opinion I'm thinking Roberts will write the majority for this one against the mandate. 5-4. Just a guess though.
LegendofJoe
Member
I have this horrible feeling in my stomach right now
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked