• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Support for Repeal climbs to 63%

I gave you the reality of what is going to happen based on my profession, the realities of it, and what is in the bill. Again, I am an insurance professional so I know what these things mean. But hey, when your insurance agent drives up in a Bentley while you're starving each month to make premium don't blame me. You were warned.

That is already happening. Has been for years. If you really are an insurance professional you should know that. People can not afford insurance now so they are going without. We taxpayers are already footing the bill for the uninsured. The entire healthcare system has become a disaster in the last decade. Why do you think Obama won with his promise to change it? Like I said I would have prefferred the Republicans come up with something, anytrhing while they were in charge. They ignore the problem so get over it. It will not be the doom and gloom you claim. Hell, we will have spent more in Iraq than we will spend on this.
 
Total Cost of War

Cost of War in Iraq; currently around 726 Bn. it is a cost that is going away as we withdraw.

Cost of Obamacare in the first 6 years of operation: about 1 Trillion. it is a cost that is going to continue to increase.

sorry, no.

there are alot of reasons why insurance now is more expensive than it need be. the prevalence of third-party payments, state dominance of the sector, state barriers combined with state minimum requirement regulation, etc. obamacare takes many of those reasons... and makes them worse.

well done. well done indeed.
 
That is already happening. Has been for years. If you really are an insurance professional you should know that.
That's your counter argument? Really? Do you even know why costs increase....here's a hint, it has to do with CYA medicine brought on by tort abuse, misuse of medical resources, and doctor shortages created by government intervention. If you don't like THAT, then you shouldn't be supporting this bill as it adds to the regulatory costs already strained by ridiculously overlegislated insurance and medical fields through intervention.
People can not afford insurance now so they are going without.
Then there will be less of them......oh wait.....they have to buy the insurance now OR be fined and possibly imprisoned, but now it's going to cost even more. I'm gonna love my new Vette, too bad my clients will have to live down, but hey, I was against this so my conscience is clear.
We taxpayers are already footing the bill for the uninsured.
No, we aren't, sorry to break it to you but lack of insurance does not equal lack of medical care. If you need a new counter argument I'll give you time to consult the nearest democrat strategist.
The entire healthcare system has become a disaster in the last decade.
Try century, and no....it isn't a disaster, just expensive.
Why do you think Obama won with his promise to change it?
Ah yes, another democrat talking point. Obama was elected for a multitude of idiotic reasons, but that wasn't one of the major ones.
Like I said I would have prefferred the Republicans come up with something, anytrhing while they were in charge. They ignore the problem so get over it.
That is a really ignorant statement. First off this bill is not something to "get over" it is something to repeal and the major factors to be prosecuted. Your dismissal shows where you are at.
It will not be the doom and gloom you claim. Hell, we will have spent more in Iraq than we will spend on this.
Point one: I am being generous in my estimates, it'll probably be worse. Point two is complete bull****.
 

You can't go to prison for not having insurance. That's just plain false.
And yes, we already do foot the bill for the uninsured. What universe do you live in? When someone goes to the hospital without insurance and can't pay the bill, where do you think the money comes from? Your insurance company gets overbilled when you come in to help pay for that, resulting in an increase in premiums for everyone. We also spend a fair number of tax dollars helping prop up hospitals.
 
That's your counter argument? Really? Do you even know why costs increase....here's a hint, it has to do with CYA medicine brought on by tort abuse, misuse of medical resources, and doctor shortages created by government intervention. If you don't like THAT, then you shouldn't be supporting this bill as it adds to the regulatory costs already strained by ridiculously overlegislated insurance and medical fields through intervention. Then there will be less of them......oh wait.....they have to buy the insurance now OR be fined and possibly imprisoned, but now it's going to cost even more. I'm gonna love my new Vette, too bad my clients will have to live down, but hey, I was against this so my conscience is clear. No, we aren't, sorry to break it to you but lack of insurance does not equal lack of medical care. If you need a new counter argument I'll give you time to consult the nearest democrat strategist. Try century, and no....it isn't a disaster, just expensive. Ah yes, another democrat talking point. Obama was elected for a multitude of idiotic reasons, but that wasn't one of the major ones. That is a really ignorant statement. First off this bill is not something to "get over" it is something to repeal and the major factors to be prosecuted. Your dismissal shows where you are at. Point one: I am being generous in my estimates, it'll probably be worse. Point two is complete bull****.

You have repeated every republican talking point concerning the bill. I've heard them all before.
 
You can't go to prison for not having insurance. That's just plain false.
Yes you can, there is a tax evasion provision written into the language enforcible by the I.R.S.
And yes, we already do foot the bill for the uninsured.
No we do not. For people without a means to pay that abuse the E.R. instead of going to a clinic or public hospital then yes, people pay for them. This is not the case for people who self-insure which is part of the "uninsured" segment. So again you do not know what you are talking about.
What universe do you live in?
It's called the real world. You're welcome to visit sometime.
When someone goes to the hospital without insurance and can't pay the bill, where do you think the money comes from?
Depends on what the situation is.
Your insurance company gets overbilled when you come in to help pay for that, resulting in an increase in premiums for everyone. We also spend a fair number of tax dollars helping prop up hospitals.
You got one correct. Now for the kicker, how does the bill address the cost issue and the abuse issue? You know what, I'll answer for you; The bill does nothing.......absolutely nothing to address costs, it merely shifts payment further towards tax payers. Costs will not go down because people are illegally forced to buy insurance, in fact everyone's costs will go up. As well, people will still abuse the system because they do not "have to pay" and if the ultimate goal of UHC becomes reality every factor will be magnified. But please feel free to keep making blanket statements as if you have experience in the insurance and medical industry.
 
You have repeated every republican talking point concerning the bill. I've heard them all before.
Dude, don't address me anymore as you will get no further responses. I am giving you the reality of the insurance industry and all you can do is regurgitate the same crap Pelosi/Reid/HuffPo have been putting out, they do not know **** about the situation which means recycling the points means that person knows even less. I am an insurance agent and have industry experience, I am against the bill even though the mandates could bring me ridiculous business increases which should tell you everything you need to know. Companies that provide h.i. are having to make daily compliance adjustments which means they are wasting valuable time that would best serve clients on keeping up with the newly created beauracratic bull****. So don't tell me "how it is" because you do not have the slightest clue.
 
. I am an insurance agent and have industry experience, I am against the bill even though the mandates could bring me ridiculous business increases which should tell you everything you need to know. .
Not one person here believes that.

http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2010/03/30/romney_defends_massachusetts_health_care_law/

“Basically, it’s the same thing,’’ said Jonathan Gruber, an MIT economist who advised the Romney and Obama administrations on their health insurance programs. A national health overhaul would not have happened if Mitt Romney had not made “the decision in 2005 to go for it. He is in many ways the intellectual father of national health reform.’’
 
Last edited:
Not one person here believes that.

Romney defends Massachusetts health care law - The Boston Globe

“Basically, it’s the same thing,’’ said Jonathan Gruber, an MIT economist who advised the Romney and Obama administrations on their health insurance programs. A national health overhaul would not have happened if Mitt Romney had not made “the decision in 2005 to go for it. He is in many ways the intellectual father of national health reform.’’
A newspaper and an economist from a technological institution are not a substitute for a professional opinion. Now I'm done as I'm wasting time.
 
A newspaper and an economist from a technological institution are not a substitute for a professional opinion. Now I'm done as I'm wasting time.

Do you deny Romney and Obamas plans are similar?
 
No, and Romneycare is an immense failure. Thanks for making my point.

Not according to Romney or the people of Massachusettes. Only according to you, an insurance agent.
Obama took a republican model and put his name on it. I think that is really why republicans are going bananas.
 
Not according to Romney or the people of Massachusettes. Only according to you, an insurance agent.
Obama took a republican model and put his name on it. I think that is really why republicans are going bananas.
Like always, you lose.

Romneycare's Fatal Flaw - CBS News
Romney’s Folly - Michael F. Cannon - National Review Online
Learning from Romneycare’s Failures | FrumForum
Romneycare Didn't Work in Massachusetts


Now instead of playing the tiresome and wholly disgusting blame the agent game read and learn.
 
Not according to Romney or the people of Massachusettes. Only according to you, an insurance agent.
Obama took a republican model and put his name on it. I think that is really why republicans are going bananas.

Since when was Romneycare "a Republican model"? It was passed by a heavily Democratic legistlature and a moderate Republican governor. Most Republicans elsewhere in the nation don't want it. It doesn't speak to any Republican platform.
 
Since when was Romneycare "a Republican model"? It was passed by a heavily Democratic legistlature and a moderate Republican governor. Most Republicans elsewhere in the nation don't want it. It doesn't speak to any Republican platform.

Why do you think they call it Romneycare? Mitt is a republican if you didn't know. It was his baby.
Now that Obama calls it his they don't want it.
 
Why do you think they call it Romneycare? Mitt is a republican if you didn't know. It was his baby.
Now that Obama calls it his they don't want it.

You might want to look at the two parties like this... it's one party with two names. It doesn't matter if a politician is a republican or a democrat, since they're virtually identical in the goal of implementing absolute despotism and a tyranny in the government.
 
You might want to look at the two parties like this... it's one party with two names. It doesn't matter if a politician is a republican or a democrat, since they're virtually identical in the goal of implementing absolute despotism and a tyranny in the government.

I agree. What gets me is those that believe the republicans are somehow better than the democrats. Both parties are equally inept.
 
I agree. What gets me is those that believe the republicans are somehow better than the democrats. Both parties are equally inept.

Agreed there and to think it only took to us opening our eyes to what the one party with two names wants to accomplish.
 
Why do you think they call it Romneycare? Mitt is a republican if you didn't know. It was his baby.
Now that Obama calls it his they don't want it.

we didn't want it in the first place. republicans george w bush and john mccain also supported amnesty/'comprehensive immigration reform'; care to guess how well that went over with Republicans?
 
Since when was Romneycare "a Republican model"? It was passed by a heavily Democratic legistlature and a moderate Republican governor. Most Republicans elsewhere in the nation don't want it. It doesn't speak to any Republican platform.

Because the Republicans floated a similar proposal during the Clinton administration. This was basically their idea.
 
so you are arguing that republicans have gotten alot smarter while Democrats have gotten dumber?
 
so you are arguing that republicans have gotten alot smarter while Democrats have gotten dumber?
.
The Democrats have become dumb enough to pass Republican bills while being called socialists for doing it, yes.

I'm not sure I'd call the GOP's massive negative PR campaign "smarter," seeing as how it was largely based on outright deception, but it was certainly effective.
 
Last edited:
:lol: romney care is romney's alone. that's like pretending that reducing the welfare state is a democratic policy because Clinton did it :roll:


although i will admit, i find it hilarious that people are now trying to pin blame for Obamacare..... on Republicans. :lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom