PPACA and Scotus

[wgrr]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

I hate to disagree with you, because I usually like your posts.

However, most people will THANK the Republicans, even though they have a very poor understanding of what they've been "saved" from. The guys here are much more astute, to be fair. But, when your out and about, just ask a few "Average Joes" what they think of it. I'll save you a lot of time-----They're ignorant. All they know is that some asshat rightwing pundit told them it's "So(c)ialism".

Even my boss, whom I like, respect and regard as decent, hardworking guy, who put his son (23 yrs. old) on his healthplan the instant he could...Is completely opposed to ACA. I asked him if he knew the "under 26" part came from ACA.....He didn't. Management told them it was ".....something new in the insurance plan." When I told him about all of the other things you described above, I got, "Yeah, well fuck that Obamacare shit anyways.".

This is the reality of our times, my good man. The GOP could simply take PPACA as it is, rebadge it as "The True Patriot Great American Eagle Health Plan" (Or some hokey, pseudo-patriotic crap like that.) and walk away smelling like a rose. Their starry-eyed acolytes thanking divine providence for sending Mitt to save them from the Totalitarian So(c)ialist......

And, I'm thinking that that, to some degree, is exactly what they plan to do.

Dave

I actually was paraphrasing an article where Boehner was the one who is worried about the lash back. If the SC kills the entire ACA, and they might, the House will be scrambling to come up with plans to protect their base from being affected by the loss of their already in place provisions of the ACA. Seniors on Medicare will see their drug prices go up when the donut hole opens back up. That is a lot of pissed of people that tend to vote Republican.

Boehner can't herd that group of cats as it is. The tea baggers would never approve of any type of health care reform. It interferes with free enterprise and it is soci@lism.

[wgrr]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

It is completely useless toilet paper anyways, so long as the states can ignore my constitutional rights and make up their own. Whoever set it up that way was an idiot. No wonder we have nothing but argument and turmoil. There, still enjoying your conversation?

And, yes, of course I built it myself. And, as time goes by, I'll be modding it myself. I build my own speakers too.

Dave

I built a S.E.X amp to use for a headphone amp. I no longer need it because the C2200 works just fine. The MX110 had no headphone jack.

I decided to keep it because it is an amazing sounding amp when connected to very high efficiency speakers. (Cornwall's) Mine is stock and there are many mods I could do to improve the sound even more. The first will be to get the MQ iron.

[wgrr]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

That's not the way I read it.

State laws have been found, numerous times in our history, to be in violation of individual rights gauranteed by the national constitution.

Your rights as an American citizen should override any perceived right by the state to violate them. Otherwise, what is the point in having them?

Does Little Rock, AR Central High Federal government forced integration, in 1957, ring a bell. If something is unconstitutional, and violates your rights, The Feds can step in and force states to comply with the US Constitution. It has been done before.

[icenine]

So mandatory auto insurance would be unconstitutional? The auto insurance industry loves that one....I think the health care insurance industry feels same way about this law too...it will get them more policies......
I think Kennedy will side with the good guys and girls......I hope!

[whell]

Originally Posted by wgrr

Republicans are getting a little worried that if the ACA mandate is overturned then they will get blamed for all the good things that are all ready in affect like the ones you mentioned. Some others are caps on the amount of money insurance companies can skim off for operating expenses. Some companies were skimming off up to 45% before the ACA. It fixes the doughnut hole, no more life time caps, no cost to patient preventative care, more cancer treatment options.

Actually, many health insurers, such as United Health Care and Aetna, have already announced that they will continue many of the coverage elements of PPACA voluntarily regardless of what SCOTUS does or doesn't do.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Actually, many health insurers, such as United Health Care and Aetna, have already announced that they will continue many of the coverage elements of PPACA voluntarily regardless of what SCOTUS does or doesn't do.

Isn't that an admission that it's the right thing to do from an economic POV, just as was asserted by the CBO report that Obamacare would reduce the deficit over the next decade? Hmmm.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

Actually, many health insurers, such as United Health Care and Aetna, have already announced that they will continue many of the coverage elements of PPACA voluntarily regardless of what SCOTUS does or doesn't do.

Of course, giving the SCOTUS a little cover... in advance... if they overturn the Affordable Care Act never hurts, right?

Originally Posted by finnbow

Isn't that an admission that it's the right thing to do from an economic POV, just as was asserted by the CBO report that Obamacare would reduce the deficit over the next decade? Hmmm.

And you're going to believe Obama's CBO??

John

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Isn't that an admission that it's the right thing to do from an economic POV, just as was asserted by the CBO report that Obamacare would reduce the deficit over the next decade? Hmmm.

Well, if you're going to take that perspective, you're going to bust a lot of bubbles. Lots of folks here in this forum have long since concluded that insurance companies are incapable of doing the right thing. Think of the flack you risk taking from the other folks around here if you let that comment stand!

[whell]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Of course, giving the SCOTUS a little cover... in advance... if they overturn the Affordable Care Act never hurts, right?

So, insurance companies make business decisions to give the SCOTUS "cover"?

[icenine]

I remember a conservative on tv saying once an industry is regulated it generally becomes stronger and more immune,citing the auto insurance companies as an example. So if one is forced to buy health insurance that would seem to be a boone to health insurance companies. The SEC has not hurt Wall Street as we all know. So now Blue Shield etc will be a sort of partner with the Feds. So if the Republicans ditch the Obamacare they would be hurting a big business community?
Scratch a tea bagger and you will find a person who loves his or her mandated socialized medicare or if they are young too ignorant to realize they will need it to someday.