The Case For Obamacare

[TXgolfer]

I fail to comprehend that why Republicans in the past used to support the Single Payer System, and tried to pass it several times, and suddenly changed their minds to oppose it.

What's up with that?

When?

 

[Barbaro]

I recall Nixon and Bob Dole proposed the Single Payer System, but I think both were blocked by Democrats.

 

[TXgolfer]

I recall Nixon and Bob Dole proposed the Single Payer System, but I think both were blocked by Democrats.

No both tried to block single payer....you have it backwards

 

[Barbaro]

No both tried to block single payer....you have it backwards

I will look up Nixon's proposal.

 

[TXgolfer]

I will look up Nixon's proposal.

 

[Foxrac]

I will look up Nixon's proposal.

Nixon wanted to require all workplace to offer health insurance but... the congress said no.

 

[TXgolfer]

Nixon wanted to require all workplace to offer health insurance but... the congress said no.

Thanks for chiming in with that. :roll:

 

[Foxrac]

Thanks for chiming in with that. :roll:

Why are you roll your eye?

I wasn't try to rude but just had to explain about what Nixon wants.

I feel that require all workplaces to have health insurance, isn't enough if it isn't affordable to all to buy.

I don't like about current system that how healthcare to be practiced.

 

[DeafBadger]

2 That is when Republicans seemed to support this.....Most haven't since then.

I see. It seemed to get a lot of play at conservative think-tanks in recent years... or so it's been said. It is not a detail of importance to me, though, as I am neither Democrat nor Republican.

3 No there was no compromise.....The bill was forced through

How is a bill 'forced' through? It still requires the same minimum number of votes to pass as a bill that wasn't 'forced,' doesn't it?

5 I don't, we were pretty vocal about this as far back as the 90's

Every Republican conservative i know was fawning over Bush II during those years. It was as if they thought he could do no wrong. I find it really hard to believe that if he passed ACA, they would have demanded his resignation. It would not have happened.

Besides, where would the disaffected Republicans have gone? To a third-party to be promptly marginalized? To the Democratic Party (as we both know, not in a hundred years)? Conservatives have no where to go. They are stuck in the Republican Party. Any kind of schism would mean splitting the vote and giving the elections to the Democrats until the conservatives mended their tent.

6 Won't make a difference.... War brings both costs and revenue....When war ends you lose both. Sounds good on paper but it just doesn't work.

The military-industrial complex would like us to believe this is true, but it is not. The United States existed and dramatically grew without the military-industrial complex until the 1940s and 1950s (when the complex really took off). I think we can learn to live without it again.

So... we pare it down while keeping national defense strong, and suddenly the money is there for this so-called 'disastrous' Social Security, Medicare, and ACA programs.

 

[kokonut]

I see. It seemed to get a lot of play at conservative think-tanks in recent years... or so it's been said. It is not a detail of importance to me, though, as I am neither Democrat nor Republican.

How is a bill 'forced' through? It still requires the same minimum number of votes to pass as a bill that wasn't 'forced,' doesn't it?

Every Republican conservative i know was fawning over Bush II during those years. It was as if they thought he could do no wrong. I find it really hard to believe that if he passed ACA, they would have demanded his resignation. It would not have happened.

Besides, where would the disaffected Republicans have gone? To a third-party to be promptly marginalized? To the Democratic Party (as we both know, not in a hundred years)? Conservatives have no where to go. They are stuck in the Republican Party. Any kind of schism would mean splitting the vote and giving the elections to the Democrats until the conservatives mended their tent.

The military-industrial complex would like us to believe this is true, but it is not. The United States existed and dramatically grew without the military-industrial complex until the 1940s and 1950s (when the complex really took off). I think we can learn to live without it again.

So... we pare it down while keeping national defense strong, and suddenly the money is there for this so-called 'disastrous' Social Security, Medicare, and ACA programs.

They used a reconciliation process to bypass the Senate's 60-vote hurdle at the time (they knew they wouldn't have enough votes to pass through the Senate chamber alone) in order to end their filibusters used to kill legislation by delaying it indefinitely. It is a complex process but with the reconciliation process it only requires 51 Senate votes.

 

[TXgolfer]

How is a bill 'forced' through? It still requires the same minimum number of votes to pass as a bill that wasn't 'forced,' doesn't it?



Every Republican conservative i know was fawning over Bush II during those years. It was as if they thought he could do no wrong. I find it really hard to believe that if he passed ACA, they would have demanded his resignation. It would not have happened.


The military-industrial complex would like us to believe this is true, but it is not. The United States existed and dramatically grew without the military-industrial complex until the 1940s and 1950s (when the complex really took off). I think we can learn to live without it again.

So... we pare it down while keeping national defense strong, and suddenly the money is there for this so-called 'disastrous' Social Security, Medicare, and ACA programs.

Koko covered this.....The bill receive 0 Republican support

No, we really can't.....Not without something to replace it. Even Obama learned this lesson.

You might want to research just how bad I'd shape those programs are in.....Of course, if you don't want to believe it, that is your choice.

 

[Foxrac]

Koko covered this.....The bill receive 0 Republican support

No, we really can't.....Not without something to replace it. Even Obama learned this lesson.

You might want to research just how bad I'd shape those programs are in.....Of course, if you don't want to believe it, that is your choice.

Do you think that Social Security and Medicare could be fixed to become solvent program?

 

[rolling7]

Do you think that Social Security and Medicare could be fixed to become solvent program?

This question was not ask of me but Yes I do. But if, and only if, Social Security and Medicare are return to their original intended purposes. In otherwords Congress would not be able to "raid" SS and leave "IOUs" for the monies used for other purposes. And for Medicare, only those whom have paid into Medicare can get something out of the program.

 

[Foxrac]

This question was not ask of me but Yes I do. But if, and only if, 1) Social Security and Medicare are return to their original intended purposes. In otherwords Congress would not be able to "raid" SS and leave "IOUs" for the monies used for other purposes. 2) And for Medicare, only those whom have paid into Medicare can get something out of the program.

I know about this question isn't ask for you but the post is open to public so you are welcome to answer my question. I'm just curious about TXGolfer's opinion but sometime, he won't answer my question for unknown reason.

1) What you means about return to original intended purposes?

2) What you means about get out of Medicare program? You means that you want people to have choice to not pay for Medicare program? Your line is confusing me.

 

[ambrosia]

What I think is funny about Republicans making such a stink over the individual mandate is.....it was their idea in the first place.

I feel a rant coming on. I think they should rename Obamacare, because he didn't actually write it, or propose it. Little history lesson.... Clinton pushed for a single payer system, the Republicans countered with 2 bills, one of which was Heritage Foundation Consumer Choice Health Plan. It got killed because it didn't have enough Democrat support. Guess what it had, an individual mandate. Well when Obama told the Senate to come up with something they pulled that plan back out, dusted it off, reworked it a bit and voila....Obamacare. Here's a list of bills proposed, most of which are proposed by republicans and guess what they all have? An individual mandate....This is actually a conservative idea, making people be responsible, and it was all jolly well good until Obama supported it, and now it's evil and unconstitutional. Just saying

History of the Individual Health Insurance Mandate, 1989-2010 - Health Care Reform / Obamacare - ProCon.org

 

[rolling7]

I know about this question isn't ask for you but the post is open to public so you are welcome to answer my question. I'm just curious about TXGolfer's opinion but sometime, he won't answer my question for unknown reason.

1) What you means about return to original intended purposes?

2) What you means about get out of Medicare program? You means that you want people to have choice to not pay for Medicare program? Your line is confusing me.

1) The original intent of SS is to provide wage earners a secure retirement. The reason for this act was because most low wage earners had little knowledge of investment for the future. Remember, this was during the days where everyone, even little children, had a savings account at a bank. These savings, at the time, were not covered by FICA and there were frequent bank robbers, as well as bank failures. A regulation board was set up to invest the funds of wage earners and, upon retirement, these folks expected to receive, monthly, an amount equal to their contributions and investment by SS. Over time, Congress found itself in need of funds and saw a large source of funds sitting in SS's control and through their actions allowed themself to borrow (IOU) funds that through the years were never paid-in-full. Also, Congress through its actions made it possible for non-wage earners whom had not contributed to SS to receive benefits from SS. I call this a legal back-door stupid action the general public turn a blind eye to.

2) Medicare, just like SS, originally was set up for those wage earners whom contribute to SS to have a health plan for their retirement years. In order to receive benefits from Medicare, folks first had to contribute from their wages and to also qualify fri retirement benefits under SS regulations. Again, Congress has "watered doreen" the requirements to receive benefits from Medicare to folks who have not yet qualified to receive standard SS retirement benefits nor have they paid into the system.


The question concerns can these two programs ever return to solvent. First, they are rapidly approaching insolvency and continue actions of todays management will certainly destroy both. So the only possible way to assure solvency of both is to return to the original order and to collect those IOUs at a max. dollar value.

 

[TXgolfer]

What I think is funny about Republicans making such a stink over the individual mandate is.....it was their idea in the first place.

I feel a rant coming on. I think they should rename Obamacare, because he didn't actually write it, or propose it. Little history lesson.... Clinton pushed for a single payer system, the Republicans countered with 2 bills, one of which was Heritage Foundation Consumer Choice Health Plan. It got killed because it didn't have enough Democrat support. Guess what it had, an individual mandate. Well when Obama told the Senate to come up with something they pulled that plan back out, dusted it off, reworked it a bit and voila....Obamacare. Here's a list of bills proposed, most of which are proposed by republicans and guess what they all have? An individual mandate....This is actually a conservative idea, making people be responsible, and it was all jolly well good until Obama supported it, and now it's evil and unconstitutional. Just saying

History of the Individual Health Insurance Mandate, 1989-2010 - Health Care Reform / Obamacare - ProCon.org

Have you not been reading the threads..... we have discussed this at length. Even people who supported these bills backed away from them...
And that was 19 years ago.

 

[Foxrac]

1) The original intent of SS is to provide wage earners a secure retirement. The reason for this act was because most low wage earners had little knowledge of investment for the future. Remember, this was during the days where everyone, even little children, had a savings account at a bank. These savings, at the time, were not covered by FICA and there were frequent bank robbers, as well as bank failures. A regulation board was set up to invest the funds of wage earners and, upon retirement, these folks expected to receive, monthly, an amount equal to their contributions and investment by SS. Over time, Congress found itself in need of funds and saw a large source of funds sitting in SS's control and through their actions allowed themself to borrow (IOU) funds that through the years were never paid-in-full. Also, Congress through its actions made it possible for non-wage earners whom had not contributed to SS to receive benefits from SS. I call this a legal back-door stupid action the general public turn a blind eye to.

2) Medicare, just like SS, originally was set up for those wage earners whom contribute to SS to have a health plan for their retirement years. In order to receive benefits from Medicare, folks first had to contribute from their wages and to also qualify fri retirement benefits under SS regulations. Again, Congress has "watered doreen" the requirements to receive benefits from Medicare to folks who have not yet qualified to receive standard SS retirement benefits nor have they paid into the system.


The question concerns can these two programs ever return to solvent. First, they are rapidly approaching insolvency and continue actions of todays management will certainly destroy both. So the only possible way to assure solvency of both is to return to the original order and to collect those IOUs at a max. dollar value.

Oh, I see, that's very interesting about what are you saying about original version of SS and Medicare.

I don't support government to offer SS or Medicare to people who don't make contribution to program, especially whoever NEVER work for rest of life.

Zero contribution = No SS/Medicare

For me, I think SS and Medicare can be fixed to be solvent and we should shut the fraud down.

Thank you for answering my question.

 

[Steinhauer]

Do you know how hard it is to find a health/medical insurance company that will cover the cost of hearing aids?

Now get this. Obamacare has absolutely no provisions for the hearing impaired.

None.

If the Federal Government, under Obamacare, will not have any provisions covering the cost of hearing aids, or audiological visits, what makes you think a private insurance company will do the same?

I realize this is a different topic altogether, but has anyone actually read up on how drastically Obama altered the ADA?

He has made it downright hostile to private businesses. I guess when George Bush Sr, signed the ADA into law, everyone assumed that the term "reasonable" could be agreed upon.

A Hotel owner could use a portable lift for wheelchair users if they wanted to go swimming in the pool ... not anymore. Depending on the size of the pool, a number of permanent fixtures must be put in place, and a staff member specifically trained to operate them, at every utility that uses water. A pool, a jacuzzi, a wading pool ... at 3-5 grand a pop.

The portable lift? Throw it away ...

Oh yeah, and golf course greens must meet equal accessibility laws, meaning the greens must be wheel chair accessible. Say goodbye to rye and bermuda ...its fake turf from here on out.

Thanks Obama!!! :roll:

(but I already have a daddy)

 

[Foxrac]

Do you know how hard it is to find a health/medical insurance company that will cover the cost of hearing aids?

Now get this. Obamacare has absolutely no provisions for the hearing impaired.

None.

If the Federal Government, under Obamacare, will not have any provisions covering the cost of hearing aids, or audiological visits, what makes you think a private insurance company will do the same?

I realize this is a different topic altogether, but has anyone actually read up on how drastically Obama altered the ADA?

He has made it downright hostile to private businesses. I guess when George Bush Sr, signed the ADA into law, everyone assumed that the term "reasonable" could be agreed upon.

A Hotel owner could use a portable lift for wheelchair users if they wanted to go swimming in the pool ... not anymore. Depending on the size of the pool, a number of permanent fixtures must be put in place, and a staff member specifically trained to operate them, at every utility that uses water. A pool, a jacuzzi, a wading pool ... at 3-5 grand a pop.

The portable lift? Throw it away ...

Oh yeah, and golf course greens must meet equal accessibility laws, meaning the greens must be wheel chair accessible. Say goodbye to rye and bermuda ...its fake turf from here on out.

Thanks Obama!!! :roll:

(but I already have a daddy)

Who cares about hearing aids? I'm not qualified for hearing aids since mid 90's after hearing got worse.

Many private insurance companies are traditionally not cover hearing aids but they do cover CI. I'm sure about ACA will cover CI because Medicare and Medicaid (limited, many states) cover those.

The VR could cover the HA but it is depending on state so check with VR if you need new HA. If not then check with charities if you could get help with HA.

VA/Tricare covered HA for me when I was baby because my father was in Marines.

Speaking about accessibility problem, I have no idea about what are you talking about blame on government. Don't blame on Obama for any changes with accessibility because it happened for many years after ADA passed during HW Bush Admin so continue into Clinton Admin, GW Bush Admin and Obama Admin.