Jump to content

Is Obamacare Comparable To A Pro Slavery Law?


Recommended Posts

The following, inconvenient question must be considered by all honest, hardworking, moral Americans: Is Whangdoodle Barry's neo-Marxist health care ponzi scheme comparable to a nineteenth century pro slavery law?

 

Well, yes. Barry's legislation is unjust, immoral, deceitful, unwanted and racist. It's proponents like Whangdoodle, his plantation reporters and government libs all lie about the benefits of the ugly mandate, squealing "it's the law of the land!" Slavery was also the law of the land.

 

Finally, Whangdoodle Barry's healthcare scheme threatens to subjugate American citizens.

 

Fight the power, y'all!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 years later...
On 11/13/2013 at 11:24 AM, Meester Beeg said:

The following, inconvenient question must be considered by all honest, hardworking, moral Americans: Is Whangdoodle Barry's neo-Marxist health care ponzi scheme comparable to a nineteenth century pro slavery law?

 

Well, yes. Barry's legislation is unjust, immoral, deceitful, unwanted and racist. It's proponents like Whangdoodle, his plantation reporters and government libs all lie about the benefits of the ugly mandate, squealing "it's the law of the land!" Slavery was also the law of the land.

 

Finally, Whangdoodle Barry's healthcare scheme threatens to subjugate American citizens.

 

Fight the power, y'all!

 

The ACA has had the support of both parties (albeit in different decades, to keep up strategic partisan pretenses).  The entire point of the ACA was to maintain whatever semblance of market competition for health insurance customers was possible.  It has a couple of really obnoxious flaws/glitches in it, but otherwise it is the more market-based approach to health care reform of the two options (the other being single payer).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Neomalthusian said:

 

The ACA has had the support of both parties (albeit in different decades, to keep up strategic partisan pretenses).  The entire point of the ACA was to maintain whatever semblance of market competition for health insurance customers was possible.  It has a couple of really obnoxious flaws/glitches in it, but otherwise it is the more market-based approach to health care reform of the two options (the other being single payer).

There is a third, which cost less and gave me more choice, free market!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, RayDonavin said:

There is a third, which cost less and gave me more choice, free market!

 

A "free market" in health care would require deprivation and amenable mortality, which almost no one actually supports.  Not even most conservatives would actually go for that.  They want "their" Medicare/Medicaid/SCHIP/pension health benefits/VA care/etc.  

 

Further, a free market would close rural critical access hospitals/facilities/clinics way faster than they're already closing, because there are not enough people with enough money in those places to support those facilities, thus those facilities are especially reliant on Medicare- and Medicaid-based coverage to stay open.  And yet rural places tend to be the ones with the free market proponents, so they don't actually want free markets because it would deprive them of easy access to timely care.  They're unwittingly giving lip service ideological support to a set of policies that would decimate their way of life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Neomalthusian said:

 

A "free market" in health care would require deprivation and amenable mortality, which almost no one actually supports.  Not even most conservatives would actually go for that.  They want "their" Medicare/Medicaid/SCHIP/pension health benefits/VA care/etc.  

Those are the result of free market money. And other than pension health benefits all are flawed. Only the VA healthcare system does not cause the cost of healthcare to rise and it has a definite connection to mortality. No thanks I want the cost of healthcare to go down by getting rid of ACA taxes and my choosing what I need in a plan. I also want hospitals to be held accountable for the prices they charge and to stop the gouging they do because insurance companies allow it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, RayDonavin said:

Those are the result of free market money.

Not sure what that is supposed to mean.

 

Quote

And other than pension health benefits all are flawed.

Pension health benefits are extremely flawed, as evidenced by the part they play in our unfunded pension liabilities.

 

Quote

No thanks I want the cost of healthcare to go down by getting rid of ACA taxes and my choosing what I need in a plan.

Just because you need or want a certain type of plan does not mean any insurer will necessarily be willing to offer what you need or want in a plan.

 

Quote

I also want hospitals to be held accountable for the prices they charge and to stop the gouging they do because insurance companies allow it.

The only accountability for that in a free market scenario is that the people who need the care don't get it.  The hospital doesn't get paid, but people are also not getting the care.  Thus the deprivation/amenable mortality I mentioned.  And when hospitals/clinics/providers aren't getting paid for a service, they stop paying for the staff and equipment required to provide the service, and so it becomes a service they simply stop providing, thus access to care (and quality of care) takes a huge hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Neomalthusian said:

Not sure what that is supposed to mean.

Taxes come from people working in the free market.

7 minutes ago, Neomalthusian said:

Pension health benefits are extremely flawed, as evidenced by the part they play in our unfunded pension liabilities.

Not all pensions, private companies are much better at handling pensions than public sector entities.

7 minutes ago, Neomalthusian said:

Just because you need or want a certain type of plan does not mean any insurer will necessarily be willing to offer what you need or want in a plan.

Before the ACA I could get health insurance exactly as I wanted it.

7 minutes ago, Neomalthusian said:

The only accountability for that in a free market scenario is that the people who need the care don't get it.  The hospital doesn't get paid, but people are also not getting the care.  Thus the deprivation/amenable mortality I mentioned.

Odd we went for years having the best healthcare in the world with foreigners coming from England and Canada to get what they needed. You missed the point, healthcare costs would be much lower if insurance companies would actually negotiate on behalf of their customers. Hospital costs need to be closely examined. What kind of care are you speaking of? That these people are not getting?

7 minutes ago, Neomalthusian said:

And when hospitals/clinics/providers aren't getting paid for a service, they stop paying for the staff and equipment required to provide the service, and so it becomes a service they simply stop providing, thus access to care (and quality of care) takes a huge hit.

Not everyone who goes to the hospital is a freeloader but the costs of the freeloader are born by the rest of us hence the high cost of the ACA and healthcare in general. The ACA has caused many hospitals and clinics to go out of business due to hidden taxes, additional staff required to follow it's regulations and it's low reimbursement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Debs said:

GOD you Treason Monkeys are STUPID. There doesn't seem to be a ONE of you that has any HOPE for higher brain function EVER in your entire pathetic lives

STFU YOU LIBERAL ASSWIPE KUNT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RayDonavin said:

Taxes come from people working in the free market.

 

So you're conflating government health programs with "free market?"

 

Quote

Not all pensions, private companies are much better at handling pensions than public sector entities.

 

But again, your previous comment was pension health benefits are not flawed.  I said they are very flawed as evidenced by their contribution to unfunded pension liabilities.

 

Quote

Before the ACA I could get health insurance exactly as I wanted it.

 

No you couldn't.  If you anecdotally allege whatever was offered back then happened to be satisfactory to you, great, but that doesn't mean everyone is offered whatever they want and/or need by insurers in a free market scenario.  Some people want or need insurance coverage at a cost that wouldn't remotely cover the insurer's risk, so insurers will refuse to sell that coverage at those prices.  This is why Medicare was created, because insurers' risk of loss due to old age people's bodies falling apart approaches infinity as they age, and so to spread that risk they'd have to charge premiums that seniors (and/or other customers) simply couldn't and/or wouldn't pay.  Medicare isn't a free market solution, it's a government solution to a problem the free market would refuse to address.

 

Quote

Odd we went for years having the best healthcare in the world with foreigners coming from England and Canada to get what they needed. You missed the point, healthcare costs would be much lower if insurance companies would actually negotiate on behalf of their customers.

 

They do negotiate on behalf of their customers.  They need to satisfy their customers or those customers will stop buying insurance from them.  They build networks of providers and make those providers sign contracts restricting what they charge for their services to a specified amount.  Often times they prohibit balance-billing in those contracts too.  Satisfying their customers means 1) building a decent network of providers, 2) keeping rates to those providers reasonable enough that they'll stay in the network, but low enough that the premiums won't chase the customers away, and 3) that provides the breadth of coverage the customers expect from their insurer.  So the negotiations are on behalf of the customers.  

 

Quote

Hospital costs need to be closely examined.

 

And who would do that in a "free market?"  For free markets to control cost, buyers or sellers must refuse the sale until the price is acceptable/affordable.  When it comes to health care, the refusal of the sale/provision of service is the deprivation I'm talking about.  

 

Quote

Not everyone who goes to the hospital is a freeloader but the costs of the freeloader are born by the rest of us hence the high cost of the ACA and healthcare in general.

 

The ACA did not do anything to especially enable freeloaders.  How does anyone end up in medical bankruptcy if it's so simple to freeload?  Some people are in a state of medical bankruptcy, whether officially or de facto, they have no disposable money whatsoever with which to pay any medical bills, yet they have recurrent medical needs.  A free market would deprive such people of care until they die.  If society continues providing care via any sort of mechanism or program established by legislation/government, then that society does not have a free market with regard to that good/service.

 

Quote

The ACA has caused many hospitals and clinics to go out of business due to hidden taxes, additional staff required to follow it's regulations and it's low reimbursement.

 

You're dodging pretty much everything I'm saying.  You're touting "free markets" while ignoring the fact that rural health care (which serve people who overwhelmingly believe they favor free markets) is extremely dependent on government provision for health care, not free market health care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...