5-4 Decision Affirms Obamacare

[Taxmancometh]

What ever happened to good old fashion American competition? It is the hallmark of commerce and this is how health care should be handled. Not by a socialist system mandated by the Government.

The taxman cometh.

[thephilosophizer]

How is it that these supposed legal geniuses in the SCOTUS interpret a mandate to buy private health insurance a tax, and thus Constitutional?

Because they are SCOTUS justices, and that's their job...?

[tony_j15]

What are you gloating about. Your system is so fucked up they send pregnant women to the U.S. !

Some Canadian mothers forced to give birth in U.S. | News | Seattle News, Weather, Sports, Breaking News | KOMO News

From your article:

a woman from Calgary, one of the wealthiest cities in Canada, had to travel to Montana to give birth to her identical quadruplets.

They needed neo-natal specialty care, and there simply weren't enough beds available. It's like this here, too. In Joplin, babies needing special care usually get air-lifted to either Kansas City or Saint Louis.
Let's ignore the rhetoric and concentrate on the facts, eh?

What ever happened to good old fashion American competition? It is the hallmark of commerce and this is how health care should be handled. Not by a socialist system mandated by the Government.

Since (almost) everyone will be required to purchase insurance, won't this increase competition?
No one is being required to purchase health insurance directly from the government. You have your choice of any private insurance company you want. How is that socialist?

[Taxmancometh]

Lets take the case of my mother's friend from Australia. She had to be on a freaking waiting list because of their socialist medical system there that she waited 3 months to have a gallbladder removed.

We don't need more government bureaucracy!

[tony_j15]

And you could walk into a hospital in America and have the surgery on the spot?

Sorry, mate. Most surgical wards in America have wait lists, just like everywhere else. If it is for something common like gallstones, you just have to suck it up and wait for your turn. That's how triage works.

Also, your thesis that Australia's single-payer system is somehow correlated to America under ACA is just flat out wrong. We do not have a single-payer system. We will continue with things as they are. You get insurance via a private company, and when you get sick, you go to the doctor. Nothing really changes for the majority of Americans who already have health insurance. The only big thing is now poor people will be able to afford health care.
Our hospitals aren't going to turn into Soviet gulags.

[Taxmancometh]

Tony, doctors in Australia are coming to America because their health care system sucks so bad.

I don't know about you, but I don't want a huge ass red, white and blue dick shoved up my arse.

[MegalosSkylaki]

There is something wrong with our health system when viewed in its entirety when the United States is #1 in Health Spending and # 48 in Life Expectancy. The solution to this conundrum is what has escaped us.

What is near axiomatic is that whenever the Government increases its involvement in anything that prices go up and often quality goes down. It is doubtful that a 2,000 page law won't increase prices as providers go through gymnastics to try to figure out and meet its mandates.

Some esteemed member jokingly remarked that the law could be spun as a jobs program. Sadly it is likely to create more clerical positions in health care, force doctors to apply more hours overseeing complience, increase the trend for the very best students to go into fields other than medicine which are more remunirative, and dishearten doctors who are already practicing medicine.

Ironically, it was the Bust of 2008 that is keeping many aging doctors still practicing as they can't afford to retire but the cuts in Madicaire reinbursements is forcing doctors to drop low-paying insurance plans to offset their losses.

I have to believe that some alternative exists to this law that would go to the roots of our poor health status. While we rank high in the technology of intervention, we rank low in the practice of prevention and a solution would have to address that.

MegalosSkylaki

[Whir]

Flashpoint Radio-The Death of America. Obamacare stands - YouTube

Hi!

[Pexster]

So three different U.S. networks report it WRONG, and two out of the three immediately retract and apologize. Guess who didn't? Fox's response was "We reported it as it came in." Are they serious? Wait, I already knew the answer to that, lol . . .

[nickslick74]

Ten Tweets About Obamacare - Funny Facebook Status Messages and Facebook Fails

Even the Emperor chimed in!

[truckpuller]

So if i cant afford health insurance on this plan (as i have none now)there gona fine me 1500 bucks...so if cant afford health insurance what makes you think i can pay the 1500 dollar fine....I hope you all come visit me in jail..free health care in jail by the way...lol

[MTAtech]

Lets take the case of my mother's friend from Australia. She had to be on a freaking waiting list because of their socialist medical system there that she waited 3 months to have a gallbladder removed.

We don't need more government bureaucracy!

According to the World Health Organization the U.S. ranks below Australia (#32) at #37. You can quote whatever anecdotal cases you want, it doesn't prove what you want it to prove. Overall, Australia's "Socialized medicine" beats out our capitalist American health care system in quality and also does it at about 40% less expensive.

[tony_j15]

Tony, doctors in Australia are coming to America because their health care system sucks so bad.

Doctors from all over the world come here. And doctors from here go all over the world. That in itself is proves nothing. A link to an article backing your claim would help your position greatly.

What is near axiomatic is that whenever the Government increases its involvement in anything that prices go up and often quality goes down.

Yes. That damn Post Office is so expensive compared with FedEx. And the toll free roads I ride on every day are just horrible! And don't even get me started on our high quality FDA/Ag checked food supply.

So no, actually, it's not axiomatic at all.

It is doubtful that a 2,000 page law won't increase prices as providers go through gymnastics to try to figure out and meet its mandates.

Some prices will go up. Undoubtedly.

Some esteemed member jokingly remarked that the law could be spun as a jobs program. Sadly it is likely to create more clerical positions in health care, force doctors to apply more hours overseeing complience, increase the trend for the very best students to go into fields other than medicine which are more remunirative, and dishearten doctors who are already practicing medicine.

More patients means more clerical work. Yup. I don't forsee everyone running away from the medical field though. If that were the case, there would be no doctors in Canada or Europe. So it's wonderful rhetoric, but it's not fact nor does it correspond with reality.

I have to believe that some alternative exists to this law that would go to the roots of our poor health status. While we rank high in the technology of intervention, we rank low in the practice of prevention and a solution would have to address that.

In part, that problem exists because we do have a private, for profit based health system where new toys mean higher fees. Instead of having to come up with new methods of using lasers to fix heart attacks on obese people, we should be putting money into preventive services, just as you say.

So if i cant afford health insurance on this plan (as i have none now)there gona fine me 1500 bucks...so if cant afford health insurance what makes you think i can pay the 1500 dollar fine....I hope you all come visit me in jail..free health care in jail by the way...lol

Likely you can be covered under a state plan and through offsets/subsidies/credits.

[MTAtech]

How is it that these supposed legal geniuses in the SCOTUS interpret a mandate to buy private health insurance a tax, and thus Constitutional?

That's how:

The Act provides that this “penalty”will be paid to the Internal Revenue Service with an individual’s taxes, and “shall be assessed and collected in the same manner” as tax penalties. §§5000A(c), (g)(1).
...
Such an analysis suggests that the shared responsibilitypayment may for constitutional purposes be considered a tax. The payment is not so high that there is really no choice but to buy healthinsurance; the payment is not limited to willful violations, as penalties for unlawful acts often are; and the payment is collected solely by the IRS through the normal means of taxation. Cf. Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co., 259 U. S. 20, 36–37. None of this is to say that payment is not intended to induce the purchase of health insurance. But the mandate need not be read to declare that failing to do so is unlawful. Neither the Affordable Care Act nor any other law attaches negative legal consequences to not buying health insurance, beyond requiring a payment to the IRS. And Congress’s choice of language—stating that individuals “shall” obtain insurance or pay a “penalty”—does not require reading §5000A as punishing unlawful conduct. It may also be read as imposing a tax on those who go without insurance. See New York v. United States, 505 U. S. 144, 169–174. Pp. 35–40

(c)
Even if the mandate may reasonably be characterized as atax, it must still comply with the Direct Tax Clause, which provides:“No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.” Art. I, §9, cl. 4. A tax on going without health insurance is not like acapitation or other direct tax under this Court’s precedents. It therefore need not be apportioned so that each State pays in proportion toits population. Pp. 40–41.

[Epidemic]

Instead of having to come up with new methods of using lasers to fix heart attacks on obese people, we should be putting money into preventive services, just as you say.

You are right. How bout we start with not providing cigarettes and booze to those who are wards of the government?

But I am interested. Can you cite the case study where people who have health care decide to not eat unhealthy? I rather think that what we will see is increased expense of people who are diagnosed with disease associated with bad habbits now seeking treatment instead of dying.

I have always been interested in how people think that medical care and or government spending is going to make people stop smoking and run 1 hour a day.

[Epidemic]

How is it that these supposed legal geniuses in the SCOTUS interpret a mandate to buy private health insurance a tax, and thus Constitutional?

I don't like the law. But I think Roberts has a handle on it.

look at it this way. You could claim that the government taxes everyone for not having children, however when you have children then let you out of those taxes.

Government taxes everyone for not owning a house until they decide to buy one then they are relieved from taxes.

Now we have government taxing everyone for health insurance and if you purchase it then you have a write off of 1,500.


I don't hear people screaming that government is making me buy a house. However, how queer is it that I don't get a write off for renting? Why is it, if I decide and am fortunate enough income to have my own roof I get a write off but when I borrow a roof I do not?

there is really no different.

Government is forcing me to own my own house that I have to purchase from private companies and individuals.

[MTAtech]

You are right. How bout we start with not providing cigarettes and booze to those who are wards of the government?

But I am interested. Can you cite the case study where people who have health care decide to not eat unhealthy? I rather think that what we will see is increased expense of people who are diagnosed with disease associated with bad habbits now seeking treatment instead of dying.

I have always been interested in how people think that medical care and or government spending is going to make people stop smoking and run 1 hour a day.

I think the point Tony was making was that those who have no access to health care do not take advantage of preventative care (e.g. seeing a doctor early instead of when the ailment becomes critical.)

Thus, these people do not take advantage of primary care, which is cheaper, and thus rely upon ERs, which are expensive. When everyone has health care the overall cost drops because of the reduced burden on ERs.

[tony_j15]

Correct. And the difference in price can be enormous, it's just we don't always see it.

My fiancee went to an urgent care clinic several times and the cost was only ~400, most of which insurance covered. Last time she needed a physician, she ended up going to the ER. While the costs to her remained the same via insurance, the total cost was 1500. Why? My guess is operating expenses are higher because they deal with uninsured people there.

[mad1]

I think the point Tony was making was that those who have no access to health care do not take advantage of preventative care (e.g. seeing a doctor early instead of when the ailment becomes critical.)

Thus, these people do not take advantage of primary care, which is cheaper, and thus rely upon ERs, which are expensive. When everyone has health care the overall cost drops because of the reduced burden on ERs.

TennCare will give you some information on what will happen,
RealClearPolitics - Lessons For Health Care Reform

There are people that use the ER as their primary care physician, this is for multiple reasons. Some of the reasons are lack of health coverage, lack of money illegal alien wanting to stay off the government radar and the group of people that wait too long and then require emergency care. Some come in because they know the system, ER can not turn away any patient coming in the door, and are there to obtain narcotics( or other drugs that require a prescription), they get a prescription once out the door the take the drugs or sell them on the street.

Increasing the amount of people with health care coverage and not increasing the health care staff will only lead to longer wait times.

[brandon184]

Some of the opinions here are frightening. My perspective:

Health events are scary enough. I am so grateful every time I have used our healthcare system that I have not had to deal with the additional nightmare of worrying about whether or not I am going to be covered for something or how much it is going to cost me. I am glad that my loved ones will never be saddled with medical bills that bankrupt them. I am glad that if my kid ever falls off her bike and breaks her arm that I am not going to have to eat rice and beans for the next few months. All Canadians have access to quality, first-class medical care, at reasonable cost to taxpayers, with excellent outcomes that will never bankrupt them.

Why is that a bad thing?