Originally Posted by BadFlounder
Most of you haters on here are simply uneducated about what you hate. Learn the facts about the ACA before spouting off against 30 million people receiving affordable healthcare. Folks like you are what is wrong with this country
Have no problems with finding a way to allow everyone to be insured. Would love to find out how it will impact me specifically, but, alas, site never lets me finish the registration process. That's ok, I'll keep trying and form my opinion once I have the facts for my situation.
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
4) Insurance premiums in employer-based health care (which is all I have data for; but that accounts for a vast proportion of the private health insurance in this country) have risen substantially faster than inflation in the past couple of decades. In 2012 and 2013 -- since Obamacare was passed and then became law -- the growth has actually slowed!
Look, you are entitled to your own opinions, but not to your own facts.
Well, like others have said, it isn't in effect yet, so if it can't be responsible for premiums increasing, it likewise can't be responsible for them decreasing. I will find the link and edit this comment after, but I thought I read something this week about the reduction being more attributable to the poor economy thank any policy.
But bravo for blaming both parties. That is a start.
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
The preamble to the Constitution states the purpose of (and reasons for) the Constitution -- it does not enumerate any rights.
Show me where in the Constitution that "Health Care" is an enumerated right! It is not.
You can read it here:
The Constitution does provide a mechanism to enumerate rights:
The enumerated rights are made in amendments to the Constitution. The first 10 amendments are the ones the founding fathers felt were most important for a start:
And the fact that health care is not in the constitution and is a state right is exactly the point the media never let Romney make. He was not against the idea of the ACA, he was against the idea that it was a federal issue. Huge difference that no one seemed to care about.
Originally Posted by ned bulous
That's a myth, since they pay property and sales tax. But I'm pretty sure they don't use the courts, the military, the police, the firefighters, the roads, the educational system, etc to the same extent that these billionaire leeches do.
Are you saying billionaire leeches use more public schools and other services than the commoner? Um, have to disagree with you there.
Originally Posted by jragosta
2. The ACA is essentially the same thing that Romney put into place in MA a number of years ago - with one major exception. ACA focuses on cost reduction while Romney's plan did not - so ACA is arguably more conservative.
4. In case someone has forgotten, Congress actually passed the law with the participation of the GOP. In spite of all the whining, the US Supreme Court has upheld the Constitutionality of most of the plan. So why the complaining?
It's all a big political game for the GOP. They passed the plan 3 years ago and now want to fight it - simply for political reasons.
2. As I stated above, Massachusetts (my home state) is just that, a state (well, technically a Commonwealth, but why split hairs?). The PPACA is a federal program. Not surprising that a Republican (which Romney is actually far from ultra conservative) would favor something at a state level, but oppose it at a federal level. It is in no way hypocrisy, flip flopping, or anything other than completely acceptable and Constitutionalist.
4. Yes, it is nothing more than a political game, but not just on the GOP side. And, to be fair to the GOP, they have been fighting is since it was introduced, this is nothing new.