Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
April 19, 2014, 12:32:16 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Anniversary of Romneycare  (Read 529 times)
Benny B
Time Out
Getbig V
*
Gender: Male
Posts: 12427


Ron = 'Princess L' & many other gimmicks - FACT!


View Profile WWW
« on: April 12, 2012, 05:58:01 AM »

April 12th is the anniversary of Romneycare.

This video shows how Mitt Romney embraced Massachusetts health care reform as a ticket to national fame and glory. And it shows how he attacked Massachusetts health care reform after the passing of the Affordable Care Act.

Featuring interviews from architects and advocates of both Romneycare and the Affordable Care Act.


<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxZK0spa1yI" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxZK0spa1yI</a>
Report to moderator   Logged

!
Emmortal
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5559


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: April 12, 2012, 07:04:33 AM »

I guess discerning the difference between the federal government mandating ALL citizens buy a product as opposed to states doing so for their constituents is far too difficult a concept for libtards to grasp.
Report to moderator   Logged
dr.chimps
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 25202


Sophisticate


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: April 12, 2012, 07:15:49 AM »

I guess discerning the difference between the federal government mandating ALL citizens buy a product as opposed to states doing so for their constituents is far too difficult a concept for libtards to grasp.
Nice troll. But Romney, having now won the GOP nomination, will now have to move back from the far right to the center, all the while maintaining a distance from this previous (above^) policy position. Gonna be a tightrope. I'd hate to be one of his advisors.
Report to moderator   Logged
Bgpapi23
Getbig II
**
Posts: 239


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: April 12, 2012, 07:38:42 AM »

, 99.999% of getbiggers are in the 1% made up of millionaires and billionaires most of their income is from investments and don't wanna be taxed from 15% to 30 % like the common everyday working man, getbiggers are anti-union cause they are all CEO's and give a fuck about employee rights,getbiggers all have platinum medical insurance which covers against companies dropping them over pre-existing Heath conditions and why force someone to have insurance when they can go to any ER and still gets treated without having insurance in which the cost is forced on  the tax payers instead of on the insurance companies in which Obamacare would mandate  Grin
Report to moderator   Logged
jparker
Getbig II
**
Posts: 115



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: April 12, 2012, 07:41:43 AM »

, 99.999% of getbiggers are in the 1% made up of millionaires and billionaires most of their income is from investments and don't wanna be taxed from 15% to 30 % like the common everyday working man, getbiggers are anti-union cause they are all CEO's and give a fuck about employee rights,getbiggers all have platinum medical insurance which covers against companies dropping them over pre-existing Heath conditions and why force someone to have insurance when they can go to any ER and still gets treated without having insurance in which the cost is forced on  the tax payers instead of on the insurance companies in which Obamacare would mandate  Grin
Roll Eyes  Grin
Report to moderator   Logged
Coach is Back!
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 22147


Regarding Obama...I told you so!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: April 12, 2012, 08:04:33 AM »

I guess discerning the difference between the federal government mandating ALL citizens buy a product as opposed to states doing so for their constituents is far too difficult a concept for libtards to grasp.

This ^^^
Report to moderator   Logged
jesusbod
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1949


Bite Me!


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: April 12, 2012, 09:41:11 AM »

I guess discerning the difference between the federal government mandating ALL citizens buy a product as opposed to states doing so for their constituents is far too difficult a concept for libtards to grasp.

This has been the whole argument from the beginning. The individual mandate. Is the penalty for not being covered a tax or not? And can the federal government force someone to buy a product. The Obama administration doesn't see penalty as a tax but will have the IRS collect the "tax".. Even in the debates in front of the Supreme Court, the Solicitor General referred to it as a tax.. I hope they knock down this law.. Start over with something sensible.
Report to moderator   Logged
The True Adonis
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 40498


"We Will Correct All This."


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: April 12, 2012, 09:45:19 AM »

I said from the start that the new Healthcare Law that passed was an epic failure that should have never passed.  This is not Universal Healthcare or anything near it.  Its a giant hand out to Private Insurance Companies and should be tossed out.  The government has no right FORCING you to buy a product from the private sector such as this.  Especially such an inferior one that is full of holes and is not even tangible.
Report to moderator   Logged

E
Benny B
Time Out
Getbig V
*
Gender: Male
Posts: 12427


Ron = 'Princess L' & many other gimmicks - FACT!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: April 12, 2012, 10:53:14 AM »

Health insurance mandate began as a Republican idea
In ’90s, GOP saw an alternative to Clinton plan
March 28, 2010|Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Associated Press

   
WASHINGTON — Republicans were for President Obama’s requirement that Americans get health insurance before they were against it.

The obligation in the new health care law is a Republican idea that has been around at least two decades. It was once trumpeted as an alternative to Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton’s failed health care overhaul in the 1990s. These days, Republicans call it government overreach.

Mitt Romney, weighing another run for the GOP presidential nomination, signed such a requirement into law at the state level as Massachusetts governor in 2006. At the time, Romney defended it as “a personal responsibility principle’’ and Massachusetts’ newest GOP senator, Scott Brown, backed it. Romney now says Obama’s plan is a federal takeover that bears little resemblance to what he did as governor and should be repealed.

   
Republicans say Obama and the Democrats co-opted their original concept, minus a mechanism they proposed for controlling costs. More than a dozen GOP attorneys general are determined to challenge the requirement in federal court as unconstitutional.

Starting in 2014, the new law will require nearly all Americans to have health insurance through an employer, a government program, or by buying it directly. That year, new insurance markets will open for business, health plans will be required to accept all applicants, and tax credits will start flowing to millions of people, helping them pay the premiums.

Those without coverage will have to pay a penalty to the IRS, except in cases of financial hardship. Fines will vary by income and family size. For example, a single person making $45,000 would pay an extra $1,125 in taxes when the penalty is fully phased in, in 2016.

Conservatives say that is unacceptable. Not long ago, many of them saw a national mandate as a free-market route to guarantee coverage for all Americans — the answer to liberal ambitions for a government-run entitlement like Medicare. Most specialists agree some requirement is needed in a reformed system because health insurance does not work if people can put off joining the risk pool until they get sick.

In the early 1970s, President Nixon favored a mandate that employers provide insurance. In the 1990s, the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, embraced an individual requirement. Not anymore.


“The idea of an individual mandate as an alternative to single-payer was a Republican idea,’’ said health economist Mark Pauly of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School. In 1991, he published a paper that explained how a mandate could be combined with tax credits — two ideas that are now part of Obama’s law. Pauly’s paper was well-received — by the George H.W. Bush administration.

“It could have been the basis for a bipartisan compromise, but it wasn’t,’’ said Pauly. “Because the Democrats were in favor, the Republicans more or less had to be against it.’’

Obama rejected a key part of Pauly’s proposal: doing away with the tax-free status of employer-sponsored health care and replacing it with a standard tax credit for all Americans.

Romney’s success in Massachusetts with a bipartisan health plan that featured a mandate put the idea on the table for the 2008 presidential candidates.

Brown, whose election to replace the late Democratic Edward M. Kennedy almost led to the collapse of Obama’s plan, said his opposition to the new law is over tax increases, Medicare cuts, and federal overreach on a matter that he says should be left up to states. Not so much the requirement, which he voted for as a state lawmaker. “In Massachusetts, it helped us deal with the very real problem of uncompensated care,’’ Brown said.
Report to moderator   Logged

!
The True Adonis
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 40498


"We Will Correct All This."


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: April 12, 2012, 10:53:57 AM »

Health insurance mandate began as a Republican idea
In ’90s, GOP saw an alternative to Clinton plan
March 28, 2010|Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Associated Press

   
WASHINGTON — Republicans were for President Obama’s requirement that Americans get health insurance before they were against it.

The obligation in the new health care law is a Republican idea that has been around at least two decades. It was once trumpeted as an alternative to Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton’s failed health care overhaul in the 1990s. These days, Republicans call it government overreach.

Mitt Romney, weighing another run for the GOP presidential nomination, signed such a requirement into law at the state level as Massachusetts governor in 2006. At the time, Romney defended it as “a personal responsibility principle’’ and Massachusetts’ newest GOP senator, Scott Brown, backed it. Romney now says Obama’s plan is a federal takeover that bears little resemblance to what he did as governor and should be repealed.

   
Republicans say Obama and the Democrats co-opted their original concept, minus a mechanism they proposed for controlling costs. More than a dozen GOP attorneys general are determined to challenge the requirement in federal court as unconstitutional.

Starting in 2014, the new law will require nearly all Americans to have health insurance through an employer, a government program, or by buying it directly. That year, new insurance markets will open for business, health plans will be required to accept all applicants, and tax credits will start flowing to millions of people, helping them pay the premiums.

Those without coverage will have to pay a penalty to the IRS, except in cases of financial hardship. Fines will vary by income and family size. For example, a single person making $45,000 would pay an extra $1,125 in taxes when the penalty is fully phased in, in 2016.

Conservatives say that is unacceptable. Not long ago, many of them saw a national mandate as a free-market route to guarantee coverage for all Americans — the answer to liberal ambitions for a government-run entitlement like Medicare. Most specialists agree some requirement is needed in a reformed system because health insurance does not work if people can put off joining the risk pool until they get sick.

In the early 1970s, President Nixon favored a mandate that employers provide insurance. In the 1990s, the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, embraced an individual requirement. Not anymore.


“The idea of an individual mandate as an alternative to single-payer was a Republican idea,’’ said health economist Mark Pauly of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School. In 1991, he published a paper that explained how a mandate could be combined with tax credits — two ideas that are now part of Obama’s law. Pauly’s paper was well-received — by the George H.W. Bush administration.

“It could have been the basis for a bipartisan compromise, but it wasn’t,’’ said Pauly. “Because the Democrats were in favor, the Republicans more or less had to be against it.’’

Obama rejected a key part of Pauly’s proposal: doing away with the tax-free status of employer-sponsored health care and replacing it with a standard tax credit for all Americans.

Romney’s success in Massachusetts with a bipartisan health plan that featured a mandate put the idea on the table for the 2008 presidential candidates.

Brown, whose election to replace the late Democratic Edward M. Kennedy almost led to the collapse of Obama’s plan, said his opposition to the new law is over tax increases, Medicare cuts, and federal overreach on a matter that he says should be left up to states. Not so much the requirement, which he voted for as a state lawmaker. “In Massachusetts, it helped us deal with the very real problem of uncompensated care,’’ Brown said.
And yet you support this?
Report to moderator   Logged

E
Benny B
Time Out
Getbig V
*
Gender: Male
Posts: 12427


Ron = 'Princess L' & many other gimmicks - FACT!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: April 12, 2012, 10:58:18 AM »

Republicans created the healthcare mandate; Obama wins if the Supreme Court throws it out!
By Brent Budowsky - 03/27/12

Barack Obama supported the healthcare mandate that was originally championed by Republicans — and the right calls him a socialist. Mitt Romney enacted the healthcare mandate after working with Ted Kennedy — but Republicans champion him for president. Hillary Clinton supported the mandate — and the right treated her like the devil incarnate. The Heritage Foundation pushed for the mandate — but the right champions Heritage as capitalist heroes, not socialist villains. If Ron Paul is a champion hypocrite for supporting earmarks and running ads defending Romney on the Etch a Sketch matter, the Republican Party wins the Olympic gold for hypocrisy with its two-faced position on the healthcare mandate.

Don’t miss the excellent story in today's Washington Post titled "Provision at center of debate was a Republican idea.” Time to pin the tail on the elephant. The mandate was a Republican idea!

Republicans might soon learn: Watch out what you ask for, you might get it. If the mandate is thrown out by the court, Obama will simply run on the most popular provisions of the law that remain, with the least popular provision off the table while insurers deluge Republicans with pleas for bailouts.

Personally, I was never big on the mandate. It was always (dare I say it?) a form of corporate socialism designed as a bailout for insurers (which is why corporate socialist Republicans originated the mandate in the first place). It was not the liberals, it was the insurers, who wanted the mandate. It was not the Democrats, it was the Republicans, who invented it. It was not Obama, it was Romney, who first enacted it.

I can reluctantly swallow the mandate as a means of financing reforms, though I was for the public option, along with a large majority of Americans, not the mandate. But Republican hypocrisy runs rampant. If the mandate is advocated by socialists, as many Republicans and their largest super-PAC donor charge, aren't the Republicans who first pushed for the mandate socialists, and:

Isn't Ron Paul a socialist for supporting earmarks?

Wasn't Rick Santorum a socialist when he was the earmark champion of the Senate?

Isn't Mitt Romney the mother of Republican socialists when he enacted the mandate in Massachusetts, when he bragged about how many federal dollars he grabbed for his state and the Olympics, and when his vulture-capitalist takeover companies grabbed every tax and spending benefit to make his deals more profitable?

Wasn't Rick Perry a leading socialist when he gobbled up Obama stimulus dollars faster than a rabbit in heat and then claimed credit for the jobs the Obama stimulus created in Texas?

Isn't Gingrich a socialist for championing Freddie Mac when he was on the Freddie payroll, and when he promoted the mandate while being lavishly rewarded by the industry?

The real socialist is not Obama, who is far more corporatist than socialist and whose healthcare bill fails to challenge the industry- dominated paradigm. It is the GOP style of corporate socialism, crony capitalism or pay-for-play insiderism that even Sarah Palin condemns.

The irony is, the big winner of the healthcare case will be Barack Obama, and the big loser will be the insurance industry and the GOP if the Supreme Court throws out the mandate.

If the court says no to the mandate, Republicans will be running against the highly popular provisions that remain while their insurance-industry allies pressure Republicans for a bailout.

As for me and many progressive Democrats, we will be back pushing the public option, which was supported by more than 60 percent of voters for some very good reasons.
Not a bad place to be, supporting a healthcare proposal during an election year backed by a large majority of voters.
Report to moderator   Logged

!
240 is Back
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 79884


Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com


View Profile WWW
« Reply #11 on: April 12, 2012, 11:00:08 AM »

republicans should have nominated Jon Huntsman.

they screwed the pooch picking romney.  he's another john kerry.   losing 61% to 38% on INTRADE.  the world konws he's a mess.
Report to moderator   Logged

Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5193


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: April 12, 2012, 11:03:33 AM »

Obama was against the mandate before he was against it.   
Report to moderator   Logged
Benny B
Time Out
Getbig V
*
Gender: Male
Posts: 12427


Ron = 'Princess L' & many other gimmicks - FACT!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: April 12, 2012, 11:03:54 AM »

And yet you support this?
Yes troglodyte, I do.

Progress is incremental...universal health care all at once is impossible in this current climate, with a good half of Americans being remarkably dumb.
Obama enacting single-payer can not be done without a Civil War, and your side would lose...again.
Report to moderator   Logged

!
The True Adonis
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 40498


"We Will Correct All This."


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: April 12, 2012, 11:07:32 AM »

Yes troglodyte, I do.

Progress is incremental...universal health care all at once is impossible in this current climate, with a good half of Americans being remarkably dumb.
Obama enacting single-payer can not be done without a Civil War, and your side would lose...again.
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBGpFJuqd04" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBGpFJuqd04</a>
Report to moderator   Logged

E
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5193


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: April 12, 2012, 11:10:45 AM »

Yes troglodyte, I do.

Progress is incremental...universal health care all at once is impossible in this current climate, with a good half of Americans being remarkably dumb.
Obama enacting single-payer can not be done without a Civil War, and your side would lose...again.

Why was obama dead set against in 2008 when he trashed hillary over it? 
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5193


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: April 12, 2012, 12:04:50 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU3s2SMhjuI" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU3s2SMhjuI</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
240 is Back
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 79884


Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com


View Profile WWW
« Reply #17 on: April 12, 2012, 12:42:54 PM »

Obama was against the mandate before he was against it.   

so he's as bad as romney.  super. 
Report to moderator   Logged

MM2K
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1401



View Profile
« Reply #18 on: April 12, 2012, 01:23:11 PM »

RomneyCare is far more likely to be Consitutional than Obamacare.

RomneyCare doe not raise taxes.

Mass. wanted Romneycare, America did not want Obamacare.

RomneyCare allows people to keep the insurance they already have.

RomneyCare does not put a straight jacket on employers

RomneyCare is way more popular in Mass than Obamacare is in America

Report to moderator   Logged

Jan. Jobs: 36,000!!
240 is Back
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 79884


Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com


View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: April 12, 2012, 01:26:39 PM »

RomneyCare is far more likely to be Consitutional than Obamacare.

Mass. wanted Romneycare, America did not want Obamacare.

the majority of ppl there wanted it?   Sorry, but to me - if you're part of that 40% who does NOT want to be required to buy something - it shouldn't matter what the 60% say. 

I'm sure at one time, the majority of ppl supported a lot of things - doesn't make those things right.
Report to moderator   Logged

MM2K
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1401



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: April 12, 2012, 06:09:25 PM »

the majority of ppl there wanted it?   Sorry, but to me - if you're part of that 40% who does NOT want to be required to buy something - it shouldn't matter what the 60% say. 

I'm sure at one time, the majority of ppl supported a lot of things - doesn't make those things right.

Sorry, but there are SOME things that leaders should bend on if thier constituents want it, even though they think it is disasterous for them. Not all things, not even the majority of things, but SOME things. You have to show a willingness to listen to your citezins and do what they want. Ofcourse, the governor/president needs to use his best judgement about what to bend on and how much to bend on. Generally you do most of your bending on the domestic arena, and almost none in the foreign policy arena.
Report to moderator   Logged

Jan. Jobs: 36,000!!
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!