Supreme Court upholds centerpiece of Obama healthcare law

[Elithium]

Strawman. I never claimed I have perfect health or that I will have perfect health. I said I am responsible for myself.

I am 32 years old but I have saved about 1/3 of the money I have earned since I started working when I was 19. My passive income is a bit higher than half of my active income. I have enough assets and money saved that I will be fine (financially) through just about any disaster that I may encounter. Anything that I am not capable of covering, a UHC system would not cover.

Furthermore, while I am American, I do not reside in America. A policy that would force me to purchase something that I not only do not want but literally can not use is simply retarded. There's a reason why things are paid for with taxes and not mandates.

Finally, while I am still on the fence about whether America should or should not adopt a UHC system similar to France's or Canada's, I would not be against a proposed switch to such a system. I am against the retarded Obamacare system though. It is not a UHC system and does not fix the problems with our system (except for 1). It is piecemeal that simply exacerbates most of the laws with the current system.

If you really believe that you will have perfect health all your life, I have to tell you that's a fantasy. And you can't make policy based on fantasies.

[Dodds]

Anything that I am not capable of covering, a UHC system would not cover.

Such as?

[Senor Hoint]

Strawman. I never claimed I have perfect health or that I will have perfect health. I said I am responsible for myself.

Your ability to pay for health care without insurance puts you in a very tiny minority, not at all representative of the majority of people. And you're right, I should have said "health care" instead of "health insurance" back there--my bad.

[Dan74]

How would using mass transit limit your choice in jobs (with a few obvious exceptions that require you to own transportation)?
The sheer amount of money saved by not owning a car makes you less of a slave.

The mandating of car insurance is to protect others. The mandating of health insurance is to protect the individual.

I never said it limits your choice in jobs. It does severely limit the amount of free time you have each day, though. You aren't the only person on the bus, so you're going to get to your house (and job) much later than you would if you took a car. Most people don't want that kind of life.

[NoJingoLingo]

You aren't required to buy car insurance for your own protection, it's to protect whomever you might run into, or whatever damage you might cause by running into something or someone. Alternatively, in most cases, someone needing medical care doesn't impact other people or property. Health insurance is bought pretty much solely for one's own benefit.

So if I run into someone it's highly likely that I will not be able to pay that other person for the damages (including any injury) I might cause. So I will probably have to file bankruptcy leaving the other person stuck with the bill. If I can't afford my medical bills I will likely have to file bankruptcy leaving the hospital stuck with the bill. In both cases someone else will end up paying because I don't have insurance.

I lived in the states and I never owned a car; I preferred traveling to purchasing and paying for a car. You don't need a car in the states. It's a convenience.

Not true. Health care is not synonyms for health insurance. I have never used or needed health insurance. I am responsible for myself.

Public transportation (including cabs) is only useful if you live and work in a major city. Using public transportation (no cabs) is a hassle and takes up an enormous amount of time. And again, is only useful if you live in the city where you are employed.

You're not going to be very happy with your medical bill if you, for instance, break your leg. Including the ambulance ride you're looking at around $50k plus the loss of income.

The "Affordable Care Act" is only piecemeal because the republican party told their drones that it would kill grandma. Which part do you not like:


1. The Act was designed to reduce overall health care costs by making services available to the 32 million who currently can't get insurance. They often use a hospital emergency room as their primary care physician, increasing costs for everyone. This starts in 2014.
2. For people who can't afford health insurance, the Federal government will pay the states to add them to Medicaid. The income requirement is expanded up to 133% of the Federal poverty level - roughly $29,000 for a family of four.
3. Those who don't qualify for the expanded Medicaid will receive tax credits if their income is below 400% of the poverty level ($88,000 for a family of four). States will be required to set up insurance exchanges to make it easier to shop for private health insurance coverage.
4. Insurance companies cannot deny children coverage for pre-existing conditions. This benefit applies to everyone in 2014. Insurance companies can no longer drop anyone from coverage once they get sick. If a company denies someone coverage, that person can go to an external appeals process.
5. Parents can put their children up to age 26 on their health insurance plans. This will bring more profit for health insurance companies, since they will receive more premiums without higher costs for these healthier individuals. As of 2012, 3.3 million previously uninsured young people were added. (Source: Department of Health and Human Services)
6. The Medicare "donut hole" gap in coverage will be eliminated by 2020.
7. People with existing health insurance will keep it. Businesses prefer to offer a tax-free benefit like health insurance to attract good workers. That won't change under Obamacare.
8. Obamacare does not apply to businesses with less than 50 employees. Larger businesses are required to offer health insurance, but receive tax credits to help employees pay premiums. In 2014, the tax credit increases to 50%.
9. The Act will lower the budget deficit by $143 billion over the next 10 years by raising some taxes and shifting more cost burdens. (Source: CBO CBO Report on Health Care Reform and the Budget; Wall Street Journal, What Health Insurance Ruling Means, June 28, 2012; NPR, Medicaid Expansion, June 27, 2012)

[Zeebadee]

So if I run into someone it's highly likely that I will not be able to pay that other person for the damages (including any injury) I might cause. So I will probably have to file bankruptcy leaving the other person stuck with the bill. If I can't afford my medical bills I will likely have to file bankruptcy leaving the hospital stuck with the bill. In both cases someone else will end up paying because I don't have insurance.

Except that by driving without insurance and causing damage or injury, you may face criminal penalties.

[truthreality]

Except that by driving without insurance and causing damage or injury, you may face criminal penalties.

Right. Drivers are responsible for accidents to pay for the medical bills of the other driver if he or she is injured through car insurance (bodily injury liability coverage, medical payment coverage, etc.). The concept is the same.

[truthreality]

Not true. Health care is not synonyms for health insurance. I have never used or needed health insurance. I am responsible for myself.

In America? What type of Health Care did you receive without insurance in America?

[Yarn]

Opposition to the Europeanization of US health care is a result of selfishness, secular religiosity, and ignorance triumphing over the inexorable empirical conclusion that what they do costs far less, results in better quality care, and results in the morally superior outcome of universal coverage.

However, Obamacare is third way. We aren't really doing what everyone else did, so there is really no telling what will happen overall in terms of cost and quality.

[Elithium]

I have never needed to go to the hospital. However, I have gotten check ups (do that every time I visit the states), usually runs around $400-$600 and had a ganglion cyst removed; it cost something like $2200 if I remember correctly and it was entirely elective as it didn't cause any pain or discomfort. In any event, this has nothing to do with my point.

In America? What type of Health Care did you receive without insurance in America?

[Elithium]

Any treatment costing hundreds of thousands of dollars would not be covered under a UHC plan either. I can afford a few hundred thousand dollars before needing to take on debt.

Such as?

[Elithium]

I never said it limits your choice in jobs. It does severely limit the amount of free time you have each day, though. You aren't the only person on the bus, so you're going to get to your house (and job) much later than you would if you took a car. Most people don't want that kind of life.

Hence why you can choose to get a car.

The same is true with health insurance. Getting health insurance is generally a good idea for most people. Currently, Americans get free health care if they are poor. Those who are not poor can afford health insurance on their own if they elected to do so. However, some people, such as myself, prefer not to get health insurance.

By mandating that everyone gets health insurance, the government is effectively removing a choice from people. As an American living overseas, I see no reason what so ever that I should purchase health insurance.