Appeals Court Upholds Healthcare Law

[DC Tom]

Unfortunately, that probably wasn't by accident. Yes, they were stupid enough to do it by accident, but it's been pretty clear all along that they couldn't get single payer through the Senate, so they simply found another way to make it happen.

 

You're giving them a lot of credit for forethought - "them" being a bunch of people who's focus was on having something to crow about at mid-terms, and who were so short-sighted they "needed to pass it before we know what's in it".

 

Plus...I've seen it before. Real estate underwriters are going to all go belly-up within ten years as an unintended side-effect of Dodd-Frank.

[wyobilzfan]

I know we will disgree on this, but this is the mentlity many are left with. Insurance Carriers could care less about anything other than making money, I don't begrudge that, this is a capitalist country. Universal Health coverage has no chance in this country, for many reasons, some good, some wildy unfounded.

 

So where does that leave a citizen who wants to do right, i.e. purchase insurance and has the money to do so, but cannot be rated, i.e. cancer dx 30 years ago?

 

WIFM

 

I can afford $50k of healthcare in a catostophic illness siuation, but I cannot afford 300K, 500K or a million. The ACA gives my family that option to cover our risk, so I will take what I can get.

 

Decisions like that go against my better sensibilities, but at the end of the day we are here to look out for our own best interests on many levels, healthwise, moneywise, etc. This is not a country where we value Social program, or Socialism, so the fact I would make such a me first decision should not really suprise.

 

Again, we see this through a similar lens. Since this is a different forum... it's time for me to resurrect my strong belief that HEALTH CARE REFORM will turn out to cause the biggest divide in this nation since the Civil War.

 

 

Yes, clearly a document specifically designed to limit the scope and power of the federal government - written by people who had just taken part in a long revolt against a tyrant - was intended to give that limited federal government unlimited power to force people to do whatever it wished.

 

I believe the time has come for a Constitutional Convention. This country is ripe for it on so many levels, but this issue of the federal govt trying to control everything from health care mandates to eroding the Second Amendment has got to stop and be re-evaluated. In the US "Outback" of Wyoming, there was a recent bill (unfortunately failed because it was poorly written) in the last legislature that would allow the State of Wyoming to OFFICIALLY declare that residents did not have to recognize federal agents as legitimate "authority" figures (paraphrasing but that IS what they were proposing). We were also one of the first states (I believe FLA got theirs in first while we were changing governors) to file a lawsuit against the Heath Care Reform Act as unconstitutional.

 

 

Not sure how I feel about this idea, I certainly don't want the Supremes to turn into Judge Judy.

 

"C-SPAN asks Supreme Court to open Obamacare oral arguments to cameras"

 

But as Koko pointed out, this is probably the ultimate test of government over-reach, and showing just the "arguments" made from both sides would be good for the country.

 

 

.

 

The word Transparency comes to mind. Seriously, what issue faces 100% of the population the way health care does? Most will stay ignorant on the issue, but ESPECIALLY after THIS Supreme Court basically ruled that corporations (lobbyist groups) can be considered "individuals" and be treated the same with regard to political donations... what do you think they are capable of doing to health care reform? That one is still making me shake my head.

 

Those who do not bother to be informed on the issue should just STFU when it comes decision time. This is something that ALL Americans better get a grip on, including the reality that health care is not a RIGHT, is already being rationed (ever hear of precertification by insurance co's), and there will HAVE to be more rationing because people cannot and most cases WILL NOT be sensible about over-utlizing the system unless they HAVE TO PAY for what they want out of their own pockets.

 

The first thing that needs to happen is to allow ERs to refuse to treat people who use the ER as a source of primary care.

 

 

Of course it makes sense.... As a country wi e are unwilling to turn people away to die, and that is good..... But that creates a situation where some people can leech on the system by not paying for insurance and just "show up" and get treated when thy get sick.... That crap has to an will end....

 

I would like to see a preference on high deductible plans though..... People need to feel the pain of paying for services, nothing like having to blow through 5-10 grand to make one weigh treatment decisions.

 

 

The good news, tomato paste in a vegetable as defined by our dept of Agriculture.... That promotes health.... I try to get 8-10 serving of hunts tomato paste daily

 

 

 

But newspaper circulation or lack thereof will not bankrupt this country.... Healthcare, will, if something was not done... And it might bring us to the brink no matter what we do....

 

 

Everybody will use healthcare eventually, and not by choice- for that very reason is why Heathcare does not react normally to traditional market principles..... I can skip buying cable, or drive my car for 20 years, I can't chose to not have cancer or get hit by a car.... Yes one could chose to skip care, but most Americans have wives, kids, family or friends that cause us to want to stick in there for a few more years....

 

 

 

It should be televised, 100%... The issue is too big, too expansive to keep it behind closed doors.... And, Americans ,ought learn something!

 

WORD! And to those who remain ignorant, they should STFU when we ALL get our dose of reality. Health care is going to bankrupt this country faster than any other single issue, and I'm continuously stunned by the ignorance of the general public on the most basic issues that need to be corrected in our health care system as it "dysfunctions" today.

 

 

Costs are not going down for the foreseeable future, why do people not get that? Increase population, more drugs and t herapies to treat more conditions, a incrasingly unhealthily population, everyone wants to make money off the system, there are huge capital expansion of facilities all over the country... Why would expenditures go down..... They're not....

 

Your options are price controls, and that already doesn't work, or more money into the system so each American is paying their portion. From there, you try to find economies of scale, an overall improvement of preventative medicine and encourage the shrinking waistlines in the US...

 

Here's the bottom line- Americans are going to have get real with the fact that Walmart and China do not run out Heathcare system, stocking shelves with trash.... Our system tech and expertise wise is the best in the world, even though for dollars spent we lag in outcomes in many areas... when you have the best, you have to pay for it.... We will have to get over this "cheap" mentality.....

 

Applaud. We also have to get past the notion that everyone is "entitled" to unlimited amounts of subsidized health care. Why should this be a news flash now to the "99%"that the 1% will ALWAYS be able to afford more advanced and expensive treatments. Gotta love those who believe in capitalism but can't handle it when it means they can't get what others can afford to get.

 

I say "get real". If you can't afford to pay for some outrageously expensive medical treatment, then you don't get it. You might have to settle for "Plan B" which is less expensive, or obtainable via a rationed system. For those that don't know me, my bias is what it is because my spouse was an ER doc for >20 years, and I've was a nurse and psychotherapist for 35 years. We both were "in the trenches" and know from the inside how rotten and corrupted the health care system is today.

 

Americans are the most stupid%

Edited November 18, 2011 by wyobilzfan

[DC Tom]

In the US "Outback" of Wyoming, there was a recent bill (unfortunately failed because it was poorly written) in the last legislature that would allow the State of Wyoming to OFFICIALLY declare that residents did not have to recognize federal agents as legitimate "authority" figures (paraphrasing but that IS what they were proposing).

 

The only way that's not a call for secession is if the people sponsoring the bill are stupid enough to think they can have their cake and eat it too.

[wyobilzfan]

The only way that's not a call for secession is if the people sponsoring the bill are stupid enough to think they can have their cake and eat it too.

 

LOL! Really? Now that would be a shocking thing to the People's Republic of Wyoming (/sarcasm). We propose a LOT of bills in our state legislature just to rattle the fed's chains. No intention of passing them, but we do get a sort of perverse pleasure out of taunting them.

[ExiledInIllinois]

LOL! Really? Now that would be a shocking thing to the People's Republic of Wyoming (/sarcasm). We propose a LOT of bills in our state legislature just to rattle the fed's chains. No intention of passing them, but we do get a sort of perverse pleasure out of taunting them.

 

I mean, you said it with you own words. The explanation of this disorder that Wyoming and the rest of the right has =

 

"Oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) is a diagnosis described by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) as an ongoing pattern of disobedient, hostile and defiant behavior toward authority figures which goes beyond the bounds of normal childhood behavior. People who have it may appear very stubborn and angry.

 

Behavioral featuresCommon features of Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) include excessive, often persistent anger, frequent temper tantrums or angry outbursts, and disregard for authority. Children and adolescents with this disorder often annoy others on purpose, blame others for their mistakes, and are easily annoyed. Parents often observe more rigid and defiant behaviors than in siblings.^[1] In addition, these young people may appear resentful of others and when someone does something they don't like they often take revenge on them.^[2]

 

In order for a child or adolescent to qualify for a diagnosis of ODD these behaviors must cause considerable distress for the family and/or interfere significantly with academic or social functioning. Interference might take the form of preventing the child or adolescent from learning school material or making friends, or placing him or her in harmful situations. These behaviors must also persist for at least six months. Effects of ODD can greatly be amplified by other disorders in comorbidity such as ADHD.^[3]"

[3rdnlng]

I mean, you said it with you own words. The explanation of this disorder that Wyoming and the rest of the right has =

 

"Oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) is a diagnosis described by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) as an ongoing pattern of disobedient, hostile and defiant behavior toward authority figures which goes beyond the bounds of normal childhood behavior. People who have it may appear very stubborn and angry.

 

Behavioral featuresCommon features of Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) include excessive, often persistent anger, frequent temper tantrums or angry outbursts, and disregard for authority. Children and adolescents with this disorder often annoy others on purpose, blame others for their mistakes, and are easily annoyed. Parents often observe more rigid and defiant behaviors than in siblings.^[1] In addition, these young people may appear resentful of others and when someone does something they don't like they often take revenge on them.^[2]

 

In order for a child or adolescent to qualify for a diagnosis of ODD these behaviors must cause considerable distress for the family and/or interfere significantly with academic or social functioning. Interference might take the form of preventing the child or adolescent from learning school material or making friends, or placing him or her in harmful situations. These behaviors must also persist for at least six months. Effects of ODD can greatly be amplified by other disorders in comorbidity such as ADHD.^[3]"

OMG, LOL, we voted in a president with ODD?

[ExiledInIllinois]

OMG, LOL, we voted in a president with ODD?

 

No. Obama doesn't have it... You and the right have it (ODD)... See you are blaming other people. Just get onboard with the program comrade!

[WilliamCody]

Again, we see this through a similar lens. Since this is a different forum... it's time for me to resurrect my strong belief that HEALTH CARE REFORM will turn out to cause the biggest divide in this nation since the Civil War.

 

Are you forgetting about Civil Rights? I think HCR is a proxy for a much larger debate on the relationship between government and the private sector. This will be the major debate, and HCR is a proxy, much like the Kansas-Nebraska, Missouri, and Transcontinental RR debates were proxies for the larger debate on the control of the federal government by slave and free states. I think the major contemporary schism doesn't start and end with Health Care, I think it revolves around how people view "the market."

 

 

I believe the time has come for a Constitutional Convention. This country is ripe for it on so many levels, but this issue of the federal govt trying to control everything from health care mandates to eroding the Second Amendment has got to stop and be re-evaluated. In the US "Outback" of Wyoming, there was a recent bill (unfortunately failed because it was poorly written) in the last legislature that would allow the State of Wyoming to OFFICIALLY declare that residents did not have to recognize federal agents as legitimate "authority" figures (paraphrasing but that IS what they were proposing). We were also one of the first states (I believe FLA got theirs in first while we were changing governors) to file a lawsuit against the Heath Care Reform Act as unconstitutional.

 

If someone calls a Constitutional COnvention, there will be Civil War. The state of political discourse in this country couldn't handle it. There was a reason that the 1790 Convention was held in secret. The published reason for meeting was to hammer out trade relations between the states. Only after they started meeting did they begin to redraft a constitution. And they specifically told their members not to report on this back to their states.

 

 

The word Transparency comes to mind. Seriously, what issue faces 100% of the population the way health care does? Most will stay ignorant on the issue, but ESPECIALLY after THIS Supreme Court basically ruled that corporations (lobbyist groups) can be considered "individuals" and be treated the same with regard to political donations... what do you think they are capable of doing to health care reform? That one is still making me shake my head.

 

Totally agree.

 

Those who do not bother to be informed on the issue should just STFU when it comes decision time. This is something that ALL Americans better get a grip on, including the reality that health care is not a RIGHT, is already being rationed (ever hear of precertification by insurance co's), and there will HAVE to be more rationing because people cannot and most cases WILL NOT be sensible about over-utlizing the system unless they HAVE TO PAY for what they want out of their own pockets.

 

The first thing that needs to happen is to allow ERs to refuse to treat people who use the ER as a source of primary care.

 

Interesting, I'm inclined to agree - but I believe it is professionally unethical for them to turn people away, correct?

 

 

 

 

WORD! And to those who remain ignorant, they should STFU when we ALL get our dose of reality. Health care is going to bankrupt this country faster than any other single issue, and I'm continuously stunned by the ignorance of the general public on the most basic issues that need to be corrected in our health care system as it "dysfunctions" today.

 

 

 

 

Applaud. We also have to get past the notion that everyone is "entitled" to unlimited amounts of subsidized health care. Why should this be a news flash now to the "99%"that the 1% will ALWAYS be able to afford more advanced and expensive treatments. Gotta love those who believe in capitalism but can't handle it when it means they can't get what others can afford to get.

 

I say "get real". If you can't afford to pay for some outrageously expensive medical treatment, then you don't get it. You might have to settle for "Plan B" which is less expensive, or obtainable via a rationed system. For those that don't know me, my bias is what it is because my spouse was an ER doc for >20 years, and I've was a nurse and psychotherapist for 35 years. We both were "in the trenches" and know from the inside how rotten and corrupted the health care system is today.

 

Americans are the most stupid%

[3rdnlng]

No. Obama doesn't have it... You and the right have it (ODD)... See you are blaming other people. Just get onboard with the program comrade!

 

Exhiled----"Making it flow backwards"---you put perfectly good food up your azz and schit like this comes out of your mouth.

[Booster4324]

Exhiled----"Making it flow backwards"---you put perfectly good food up your azz and schit like this comes out of your mouth.

 

That was not funny the first time you posted it and yet, you felt the need to post that gross insult again? Uggh.

[B-Man]

Obamacare in Court -:Judicial repeal is a good thing; political repeal is better.

by Andrew McCarthy, November 19,2011

 

FTA:

 

Of course, the justices must resolve the constitutional claims that have been leveled against the risibly titled “Affordable Care Act” (ACA or Obamacare). And if Obamacare is unconstitutional, that is the end of the matter — if the Constitution forbids the ACA, its policy implications are irrelevant.

 

Yet, the reverse is not true: Even if the Court concludes that Obamacare is a valid exercise of congressional power, it will still be horrific policy. That is the point. We have a Constitution for a free people. It empowers the people’s elected representatives to do all manner of ruinous things, but that does not mean those things ought to be done. Obamacare is not an issue on which the justices should be the final word. By lowering their sails once the legal armada streamed to the rescue, congressional Republicans have abdicated their responsibility, foolishly raised the stakes of the judicial proceedings in the public mind, and sold short the Right’s best issue in the 2012 presidential campaign.

 

{snip}

 

The overturning of Obamacare by judicial means would be a good thing. But that is only because Obamacare is so bad for the country: Its overturning by any lawful means would be preferable to its implementation. Still, a judicial invalidation would be very far from the best way to achieve repeal. And tactically speaking, the nearly exclusive reliance on the justices to do the right thing is extraordinarily foolish. What Obamacare needs now, what it has always needed, and what it will continue to need after the Supremes issue their ruling next year is a political repeal — and a replacement that rejects the premise that medical care is a corporate asset of which Leviathan should manage (i.e., ration) the distribution.

 

N.R.O.

 

 

 

.

Edited November 20, 2011 by B-Man

[3rdnlng]

That was not funny the first time you posted it and yet, you felt the need to post that gross insult again? Uggh.

 

Ah, the drive-by internet stalker strikes again.

[Booster4324]

Ah, the drive-by internet stalker strikes again.

 

How is it drive by when I have responded to all your posts you 3rdrate poster?

[3rdnlng]

How is it drive by when I have responded to all your posts you 3rdrate poster?

 

Because your posts generally have no substance. They are just "shots' at people.

Edited November 20, 2011 by 3rdnlng

[Booster4324]

Because your posts generally have no substance. They are just "shots' at people.

 

Says the guy who thinks "And now you know the rest of the story" proves me wrong somehow. Even though your link proved me right.

[3rdnlng]

Says the guy who thinks "And now you know the rest of the story" proves me wrong somehow. Even though your link proved me right.

 

The 8:34 minute video I posted was certainly the rest of the story compared to your singular picture. Now, quit following me around and bringing this up in every thread I post in. You've been made to look silly, again. Let it go before someone feels you are on a mission.

[Booster4324]

The 8:34 minute video I posted was certainly the rest of the story compared to your singular picture. Now, quit following me around and bringing this up in every thread I post in. You've been made to look silly, again. Let it go before someone feels you are on a mission.

 

Loser. Oh and I love the fact you support Dave, but are accusing me of a crusade. Speaks volumes as to your character.

[3rdnlng]

Loser. Oh and I love the fact you support Dave, but are accusing me of a crusade. Speaks volumes as to your character.

 

 

You truly are an ass and can't distinguish between me supporting Dave's right to post and what you might consider Dave's propensities. You have been stalking me on and off and in numerous threads somehow trying to connect me to Dave. Yes, you are on a crusade but are too dumb to recognize it.

Edited November 21, 2011 by 3rdnlng

[....lybob]

Loser. Oh and I love the fact you support Dave, but are accusing me of a crusade. Speaks volumes as to your character.

I love how 3rdrate supports DaveinElmabama too, it's very progressive almost ACLU like, remember we should support freedom of speech even when that speech is repugnant, ACLU supported neo-NAZI marches 3rdrate supports DaveDukeinElma posts, of course I only see 3rdrates comments quoted so maybe it's not about free speech maybe it's about love - either way it's very progressive.

[3rdnlng]

I love how 3rdrate supports DaveinElmabama too, it's very progressive almost ACLU like, remember we should support freedom of speech even when that speech is repugnant, ACLU supported neo-NAZI marches 3rdrate supports DaveDukeinElma posts, of course I only see 3rdrates comments quoted so maybe it's not about free speech maybe it's about love - either way it's very progressive.

 

lyrbob steps into the action. What speech is repugnant? Be specific. Show some quotes. Don't run and hide from someone calling you out. I guess I should have said don't run and hide from someone calling you out again, "Mr. Expert in the Mortgage and Real Estate Industry". It's not surprising that you and Booster feel such an affinity for each other since neither of you have any real substance. It's all bs and youtube videos for you two.