The Affordable HealthCare Decision

[dusty]

Was yesterdays decision by the Supreme Court a good thing or a bad thing?

I am making this poll anonymous for what I believe are obvious reasons. Please chose your response carefully because there is a distinction between those of us who are on fixed income and those who are still earning a paycheck.

No response other than answering the poll is anticipated.

[fredsheldon]

If you are over 65 it may not make much difference. If you are under 65 and don't have medical insurance but would like to have it it might be a good thing. I for one am over insured. I have flood insurance and live in an area that does not flood, I have insurance on my 2 sail boats even though the chances of them sinking are very slim, etc. etc. If you like to live dangerously and elect not to buy insurance, you then run the risk of going broke if anything ever happens to you or your property.

[JPG]

Truth be told the 'plan' is far more complicated and far reaching than the choices given here(The choices are quite logical and appropriate for this poll).

I understand the wisdom in discouraging further comment so I will not go down that road.

Tis the road the 'leadership' of this country will travel that will prove more relevant to us all.

[dwevans]

I curious, why do people think it's a bad think to have healthcare for everyone? Every other Western country has health coverage for ALL of it's citizens.

FYI, lack of health insurance is the leading cause of bankruptcy.

[dusty]

I curious, why do people think it's a bad think to have healthcare for everyone? Every other Western country has health coverage for ALL of it's citizens.

FYI, lack of health insurance is the leading cause of bankruptcy.

Failure to adequately prepare for the unexpected consequences of life might really be the leading cause of bankruptcy.

People with manageable debt that suddenly need health care don't need to claim bankruptcy.

What it seems you are saying is that if we had socialized medicine, bankruptcy in this country would be no more. We would all spend within our means.

[JPG]

Failure to adequately prepare for the unexpected consequences of life might really be the leading cause of bankruptcy.

People with manageable debt that suddenly need health care don't need to claim bankruptcy.

What it seems you are saying is that if we had socialized medicine, bankruptcy in this country would be no more. We would all spend within our means.

A logical progression to be sure!:rolleyes: (except for that 'might' and 'seems' word')

A probable result? rotfl

Those with a propensity for causing bankruptcy by self indulgent irresponsible spending habits will most likely become more adept with the removal of health care concerns.

[dwevans]

No, what I am saying is if health insurance were mandatory that all would pay reduced costs into a larger pool, this in NOT socialism this is a basic principle of insurance.

This is the definition socialism.
so·cial·ism/ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/


Noun:

• 1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

Since the Affordable Helath Care act uses multiple public/private companies as providers, it is by definition NOT Socialism.

[dusty]

No, what I am saying is if health insurance were mandatory that all would pay reduced costs into a larger pool, this in NOT socialism this is a basic principle of insurance.

This is the definition socialism.
so·cial·ism/&#712]
[*]1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.[/LIST]Since the Affordable Helath Care act uses multiple public/private companies as providers, it is by definition NOT Socialism.

I did not say that Affordable Health Care was socialized medicine.

I said, "What it seems you are saying is that if we had socialized medicine, bankruptcy in this country would be no more. We would all spend within our means".

[letterk]

What it seems you are saying is that if we had socialized medicine, bankruptcy in this country would be no more. We would all spend within our means.

I'm not getting mired in this mess, except to say that's not at all what he said. He said that healthcare debt is the number one reason for personal bankruptcy in the US. According to certain radio personalities, i.e. Dave Ramsey this is true. You are reading far more into it than what he said. No where did he state this will end all personal bankruptcy.

Have you ever looked at a hospital bill and the difference an insurance company pays for procedures. It is night and day. Those who can least afford to pay for healthcare costs pay the most because they don't have insurance.

The thing I find funny about the whole situation is that generally most people think everyone being insured is a good thing. The thing they argue about is it being mandatory. When one who doesn't have insurance suffers a major expense and doesn't pay for it, who does? Everyone else - this shifts responsibility.

The irony is that under the idea of personal responsibly, this issue was original supported by the Republicans and attacked by Democrats. Now the roles have reversed. This will be an interesting campaign because of Romney's history with universal healthcare.

Ah, I'm mired in the mess now.

[dwevans]

Thanks letterk, that is exactly what I am saying.