Who is in favor of Obamaca?

[OzmO]

Please state why.  Use facts.


Avoid spin, insults, etc.

[GigantorX]

I think it's awful and communist! All Dr's will quit. You're just a stupid socialist, kneepadding homo. etc

[240 is Back]

Mitt romney was in favor of it on the state level, and said it is a great model for a national model.

So I think it's safe to include mitt here.

[Soul Crusher]

Mitt romney was in favor of it on the state level, and said it is a great model for a national model.

So I think it's safe to include mitt here.

The mandate is not the only bad thing about ObamaCare.   Its but one part. 

There are dozens of horrid things about obamacare having nothing to do w the mandate. 

[Purge_WTF]

Mitt romney was in favor of it on the state level, and said it is a great model for a national model.

So I think it's safe to include mitt here.

  It's completely safe to include Governor Gordon Gekko in the equation. Opposing Obamacare makes him look like a complete hypocrite.

  As long as the mandate exists, it's not something I can get behind.

[whork]

Please state why.  Use facts.


Avoid spin, insults, etc.

Depends on the long-term effects namely decreasing health care costs. Will it work? No idea

[LurkerNoMore]

Obamacare, no.

Health Care Reform, YES.

Unlike most of those who cry out of their asses on here without a clue, my career is actually in the Health Administration field.  The current model is beyond broken and only favors one entity.  I will let you guess which one that is.  Health Care Reform (or as many of us here in the biz call it Health Care Rehabilitation) is needed on all levels without a doubt.  Anyone trying to debate that point is beyond stupid.

However, I believe that reform should start from within.  Imagine a dentist doing a root canal without you opening your mouth.  Instead they just cut through your cheek and jaw.  That basically sums up the current approach to health care reform.   Yeah, the dentist can still fix the root canal but then he leaves a bigger problem behind.   If you wake up and question why the side of your face is torn up and held in place with duct tape, you really don't want to hear "oh forget that, all you need to know is that the root canal was a success."

Reform should start from within for those people who currently already have health insurance.  The people who already pay for it or who have it because they get it through their employer for waking up and hauling their ass to work each day to be productive members of our society should be the people who benefit from the reform first.  

Handing out health care and increasing the number of people covered is not really fixing health care.  It is simply exposing more people to the current broken model.  

[240 is Back]

there are some good parts to it.   kids getting covered longer.  rates already dropped for the elderly.  donut hole.

see, THIS is why it'll never be repealed.  No way in hell the repub president says "sorry elderly, we're raising those prices back up".

will never happen, and you have shit for brains if you believe it'll happen.  You may notice that even the repubs and mitt aren't screaming 'repeal!" anymore like they were - cause they now know it's never gonna happen.

Obamacare: Romney designed it and championed for a national use.  Obama implemented.  Bush apointee ratified in SCOTUS.  period. 

The repubs lost this one.  They should have passed the good parts piecemeal.  Now we're stuck with all of it, and that isn't changing.

Does anyone here disagree?  Does any getbigger believe romney will successfully reverse it?  do tell.

[whork]

Obamacare, no.

Health Care Reform, YES.

Unlike most of those who cry out of their asses on here without a clue, my career is actually in the Health Administration field.  The current model is beyond broken and only favors one entity.  I will let you guess which one that is.  Health Care Reform (or as many of us here in the biz call it Health Care Rehabilitation) is needed on all levels without a doubt.  Anyone trying to debate that point is beyond stupid.

However, I believe that reform should start from within.  Imagine a dentist doing a root canal without you opening your mouth.  Instead they just cut through your cheek and jaw.  That basically sums up the current approach to health care reform.   Yeah, the dentist can still fix the root canal but then he leaves a bigger problem behind.   If you wake up and question why the side of your face is torn up and held in place with duct tape, you really don't want to hear "oh forget that, all you need to know is that the root canal was a success."

Reform should start from within for those people who currently already have health insurance.  The people who already pay for it or who have it because they get it through their employer for waking up and hauling their ass to work each day to be productive members of our society should be the people who benefit from the reform first.  

Handing out health care and increasing the number of people covered is not really fixing health care.  It is simply exposing more people to the current broken model.  

Good one

[LurkerNoMore]

there are some good parts to it.   kids getting covered longer.  rates already dropped for the elderly.  donut hole.

see, THIS is why it'll never be repealed.  No way in hell the repub president says "sorry elderly, we're raising those prices back up".

will never happen, and you have shit for brains if you believe it'll happen.  You may notice that even the repubs and mitt aren't screaming 'repeal!" anymore like they were - cause they now know it's never gonna happen.

Obamacare: Romney designed it and championed for a national use.  Obama implemented.  Bush apointee ratified in SCOTUS.  period. 

The repubs lost this one.  They should have passed the good parts piecemeal.  Now we're stuck with all of it, and that isn't changing.

Does anyone here disagree?  Does any getbigger believe romney will successfully reverse it?  do tell.

There was an article in the paper that I skimmed this morning that stated in the last year and half the Repubs have only sent 1 - ONE - proposal that was 36 pages to the Senate as an alternative.   

Their "repeal and replace" cry seems to be dying out because #1 nothing has been repealed and #2 they haven't offered up jack shit in terms of "replacing". 

Instead they are wasting their time on another stupid symbolic vote to repeal that isn't even going to make it to the Senate.

Good job.

[whork]

Yep its easy to criticize its harder to come up with something yourself.

Its the same thing with the economy by the way.

[240 is Back]

There was an article in the paper that I skimmed this morning that stated in the last year and half the Repubs have only sent 1 - ONE - proposal that was 36 pages to the Senate as an alternative.   
Their "repeal and replace" cry seems to be dying out because #1 nothing has been repealed and #2 they haven't offered up jack shit in terms of "replacing". 
Instead they are wasting their time on another stupid symbolic vote to repeal that isn't even going to make it to the Senate.
Good job.

obamacare wsa a crap sandwich.  But for over a decade, the repubs didn't even deliver a crap sandwich.

america chose a shitty meal over no meal at all.  that's how it's gonna be.

[OzmO]

Its as if there is only 2 options.  The system we have now, or government funded healthcare.  What about letting the free market in.  The insurance industry is so heavily govt regulated already.  This has stifled competition. I mean, nobody opens any new insurance agencies to compete.  If they do, they have to follow so many rules and regulations that it is hard to offer an alternative.  Some people frame this argument as such that there are only two viable options. The current system that consumers seem to be displeased with or socialized medicine.  There is a hefty dose of ideology being spponfed to people everyday.  The people that have interest spreding these ideologies never admit that they are doing this.  I hate these liars that try to manipulate and lie to the public for their own interest groups gain.  Just ask yourself if the free market could benefit our helathcare system.  Getting government out of the insurance industry instead of total nationalization of it.  If you diminish the idea that moves more toward the free market involvement in heathcare, then you might be an idealogue.  Why not think about it, you migh not agree, but dont banish the idea from your mind.

How about generic pharm from Canada?

[Soul Crusher]

How about generic pharm from Canada?

Obama killed that in ObamaCare to get support from Big Pharma and a pr deal for Axelrod's firm remember? 

[LurkerNoMore]

How about generic pharm from Canada?

Oh you are stepping on Big Pharm money toes now. 

[LurkerNoMore]

Obama killed that in ObamaCare to get support from Big Pharma and a pr deal for Axelrod's firm remember? 

Actually ordering Canadian meds has been considered illegal long before Obama came into office.

[Soul Crusher]

Actually ordering Canadian meds has been considered illegal long before Obama came into office.

He promised to change that in ObamaCare and made a deal w Big Pharma to keep blocking that and for a deal for Axelrods firm.   

[LurkerNoMore]

It wasn't going to change.  Candidates have said that forever now and nothing happens. 

Smart Americans still order from Canada.

[Option D]

He promised to change that in ObamaCare and made a deal w Big Pharma to keep blocking that and for a deal for Axelrods firm.   

So where is the commie shit in that?

[Soul Crusher]

So where is the commie shit in that?

Its crony socialism since the rest of us are forced to pay for it. 

[LurkerNoMore]

Since i am a consumer, i support being able do get medication at the cheapest cost.  I dont know what the governments issues with this are and what tariffs/regulations/limitations are in place already.  All i know is i want to hwve as many options that i can to make my decision and anything that limits that i would initially be resistant to.  However, i am not an expert on this.  So, i dont. Know the answer to your question Bro Jackson.

The government issue with this is that they want the money spent inside the country so it goes directly into the Big Pharm pockets.  If Pfizer can charge you $70 for something here that you can get for $14 elsewhere, that means more money to them.

Now that being said, I can understand wanting to protect the Pharm business.  They are the ones that spend the money on research, testing, trials, etc...  so they should stand to profit from it.  But if the gov't wants to protect them it should not be by extorting more $$$ from the consumer here. 

Canada is cheaper.
India is much much cheaper.

[OzmO]

Since i am a consumer, i support being able do get medication at the cheapest cost.  I dont know what the governments issues with this are and what tariffs/regulations/limitations are in place already.  All i know is i want to hwve as many options that i can to make my decision and anything that limits that i would initially be resistant to.  However, i am not an expert on this.  So, i dont. Know the answer to your question Bro Jackson.

I brought up the question because representatives on BOTH sides have not allowed this.  I think i remember 07 or 08 it was shot down in congress to allow Canadian generics. 

What about TORT reform?

What i am trying to get at is that its much more complicated than just saying let the "free market" dictate the price and keep government regulation out.

We are so beyond that right now.  The "free market" approach is partly to blame here, because it NOT working, and this turd called OB care does nothing to address high costs.

[GigantorX]

The government issue with this is that they want the money spent inside the country so it goes directly into the Big Pharm pockets.  If Pfizer can charge you $70 for something here that you can get for $14 elsewhere, that means more money to them.

Now that being said, I can understand wanting to protect the Pharm business.  They are the ones that spend the money on research, testing, trials, etc...  so they should stand to profit from it.  But if the gov't wants to protect them it should not be by extorting more $$$ from the consumer here.  

Canada is cheaper.
India is much much cheaper.

But can those Indian pharma companies put out a quality product that is dosed correctly?

And as for product research from "Big Pharma", how much goes into the next cutting edge, life saving drug and how much goes into rearranging a formula or whatnot to protect a patent?

[GigantorX]

How is the free market approach at play.  There is MASSIVE regulation in the health insurance industry.  This is why it is an industry that forces a product that consumers are displeased with down their collective throats.    If you are not trolling and are genuinely interested in this. Please read that post o yours again with a more critical eye.  It is a really wrong statement.  If you are just hell bent on this ideology and not a independent person, then i cannot contininue this conversation.  Let me tell you something that is fact, ace.  Nothing even closely resembling free market ideals have been used in the relationship between government and the healthcare indusrtry.  Health insurance has been one of the most govt regulated industries recently and it is on the verge of total govt control.  Which is total loss of freedom of the individual.  You are on the wrong side of this one and cannot see how wrong you are.

It's a captive market that is a true govt. enforced monopoly.

[OzmO]

How is the free market approach at play.  There is MASSIVE regulation in the health insurance industry.  This is why it is an industry that forces a product that consumers are displeased with down their collective throats.    If you are not trolling and are genuinely interested in this. Please read that post o yours again with a more critical eye.  It is a really wrong statement.  If you are just hell bent on this ideology and not a independent person, then i cannot contininue this conversation.  Let me tell you something that is fact, ace.  Nothing even closely resembling free market ideals have been used in the relationship between government and the healthcare indusrtry.  Health insurance has been one of the most govt regulated industries recently and it is on the verge of total govt control.  Which is total loss of freedom of the individual.  You are on the wrong side of this one and cannot see how wrong you are.

Interesting coming from someone who knew little about pharm from Canada. I would think someone complaining that there isn't enough "free market" would be well versed on this.  It suggests that you are just regurgitating what the talking heads tell you to say.

If you read my post closely, you will see I am not for government control of the industry but reform WAS and STILL IS needed.  When companies get too big competition decreases and then they have a near total control of what they can charge, add that to being able to sell there pharm without world wide competition and then you the ass fucking we have been getting when we are forced to pay $74 versus $14 for the same drug.  Also, must of the new reform in OBcare is good, becuase "free market" wasn't producing services that address those issues for the reasons i said earlier int he paragraph.  

I don't disagree there is regulation that doesn't help cost.  (read it again, so you don't misunderstand me, and then read it once more, and then again once more)  I even indirectly listed one.  

Perhaps you can tell us, some of the regulation from the government that is causing higher prices.

PS re-read this:  'how can forcing people under penalty of law to buy products form a private company be a good thing"  I have been saying it over and over on the forum.