one of my buddies just told me the Health Care has passed

[garth]

where did i say you had to be wealthy?

i can see why you couldn't respond to my post, talking points don't help directly answering a question.

maybe i can make it easier for you.

1) where is it written in a free market society that everyone is entitled to healthcare, own a house, have a good job, etc.

2) you mention food. if that's REALLY the case, why is there so many obese people that are poor? you don't see many poor people here that are skin and bones like in 3rd world countries that REALLY do have to go without food.

2) canned foods high in sugar and salt, processed foods, fast foods, those are the foods that poor people can afford, so yes...you do see obese poor people in this country, obese, malnourished poor people who can't afford healthcare. That's right obese and malnourished. Obese people often are. They eat MacDonald's cheeseburgers instead of buying health insurance. I guess if someone gave up about 5000 of those cheeseburgers a year, they could buy some health insurance. There's a plank for your platform. "Buy health insurance instead of cheeseburgers."

[insidethe8thpol]

It's nice to see Pelosi throwing the Hispanic Caucus a few million illegals in for coverage for their 20 votes

[BackDoorCvr]

There is no way in hell that AARP would support the legislation if it were detrimental to seniors' health benefits. And they do support it wholeheartedly.

Actually the AARP sells supplemental insurance and will benefit financially when Medicare Advantage is essentially gutted.

[husker]

obese, malnourished poor people who can't afford healthcare. That's right obese and malnourished. Obese people often are.

maybe we have different dictionaries. how can someone be "obese and malnourished"?

[garth]

maybe we have different dictionaries. how can someone be "obese and malnourished"?

There is a little more to understanding a concept than knowing a dictionary definition. One can lack a number of essential nutrients despite being obese. If you're really interested in knowing I'll post a few articles to illustrate the point. but I don't really think you're interested in knowing. Knowing might distort comfortable, stereotypical views.

[garth]

husker, perhaps you're confusing the concepts, 'malnourished' and 'emaciated'. Emaciated or wasted away is the picture you painted of a person from a third-world country in a previous post. One doesn't have to be emaciated to be malnourished.

[garth]

Actually the AARP sells supplemental insurance and will benefit financially when Medicare Advantage is essentially gutted.

That's a good point...but I don't entirely understand how much AARP's insurance will benefit financially, Their program, like other private insurance advantage programs, is currently generously subsidized by Medicare's Advantage programs.

[husker]

we will just disagree on the malnourished thing. i guess what you are saying is that we should subsidize healthcare for individuals that chose to eat junk/unhealthy food? how about the opposite, give incentives to people to make the RIGHT health choices? but hey, most govt programs are ass backwards in this country and looking to get worse.

[insidethe8thpol]

Friday, October 23, 2009

(CNSNews.com) – When CNSNews.com asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Thursday where the Constitution authorized Congress to order Americans to buy health insurance--a mandate included in both the House and Senate versions of the health care bill--Pelosi dismissed the question by saying: “Are you serious? Are you serious?”

Pelosi's press secretary later responded to written follow-up questions from CNSNews.com by emailing CNSNews.com a press release on the “Constitutionality of Health Insurance Reform,” that argues that Congress derives the authority to mandate that people purchase health insurance from its constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce.

[insidethe8thpol]

• Expanding Medicaid, gutting private Medicare. All this is particularly reckless given the unfunded liabilities of Medicare—now north of $37 trillion over 75 years. Mrs. Pelosi wants to steal $426 billion from future Medicare spending to "pay for" universal coverage. While Medicare's price controls on doctors and hospitals are certain to be tightened, the only cut that is a sure thing in practice is gutting Medicare Advantage to the tune of $170 billion. Democrats loathe this program because it gives one of out five seniors private insurance options.

As for Medicaid, the House will expand eligibility to everyone below 150% of the poverty level, meaning that some 15 million new people will be added to the rolls as private insurance gets crowded out at a cost of $425 billion. A decade from now more than a quarter of the population will be on a program originally intended for poor women, children and the disabled.

Even though the House will assume 91% of the "matching rate" for this joint state-federal program—up from today's 57%—governors would still be forced to take on $34 billion in new burdens when budgets from Albany to Sacramento are in fiscal collapse. Washington's budget will collapse too, if anything like the House bill passes.

[garth]

we will just disagree on the malnourished thing. i guess what you are saying is that we should subsidize healthcare for individuals that chose to eat junk/unhealthy food? how about the opposite, give incentives to people to make the RIGHT health choices? but hey, most govt programs are ass backwards in this country and looking to get worse.

No, that wasn't even close to my point, but I won't pursue it further.

[insidethe8thpol]

18-24 year olds will be forced to buy health insurance at a greater rate with less coverage so that it will offset the rates of the elderly.

If they do not buy coverage, they will have to pay a penalty. Yet, the penalty is alot lower than what they would have to pay for coverage. Meaning ...................

The elderly will get stuck with paying higher premiums when the youngsters refuse to get covered.

Now this is what I call REAL Reform

[husker]

18-24 year olds will be forced to buy health insurance at a greater rate with less coverage so that it will offset the rates of the elderly.

If they do not buy coverage, they will have to pay a penalty. Yet, the penalty is alot lower than what they would have to pay for coverage. Meaning ...................

The elderly will get stuck with paying higher premiums when the youngsters refuse to get covered.

Now this is what I call REAL Reform

and when they get sick, they will pay for the insurance since they can't be refused for pre-existing conditions.

what a great system.

[slappy's son]

Just like the IRS

They are also talking about applying penalties the same as the IRS sets for tax evasion = you refuse to purchase the health care, you could be fined, sent to prison, or BOTH!! Yeah... and this is what the idiots want from their government!! Again, if this goes through.... you will NOT be able to have your own personal health care plan as you do now, and you will be FORCED to purchase the government-run health care!

[slappy's son]

Those who believe in this government-run health care program are either Marxists, or idiots, or BOTH! (personally I think it's BOTH...... there's no other rational reason for a true American to want this).