(12-29-2015 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 06:18 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-28-2015 09:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-28-2015 08:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-27-2015 02:26 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  I think an honest, informed discussion is what is needed, but we will never get one here.

You are right about that because you have your Obamacare cheerleader uniform surgically attached to your body because you are one of the few winners from this boondoggle.

Well over the last few years my wife's medical costs have been extremely high so we might have reached the lifetime max had that still been in affect. So in that sense you could call my family a winner. Of course you have that same benefit and you might need it one day. It isn't like we have something you don't also have. Each of us have employer provided plans so we don't utilize the individual market exchanges. The wife will be transitioning to Medicare later this year.

For me it is more about all the people that will see their quality of life improve because of the health coverage they now have.

So explain to me how it is my responsibility to foot the bill for this for anyone beyond my immediate family.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

First off, those are ideals and not actual laws as it is the preamble to the constitution. Second, those ideals are given context by the laws of the constitution itself. The constitution shows ample laws that protect property rights and civil liberties. However, it does not state anything requiring the gov't to establish a welfare state. IMHO, you took the preamble out of context.

(12-29-2015 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 06:18 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-28-2015 09:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-28-2015 08:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-27-2015 02:26 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  I think an honest, informed discussion is what is needed, but we will never get one here.

You are right about that because you have your Obamacare cheerleader uniform surgically attached to your body because you are one of the few winners from this boondoggle.

Well over the last few years my wife's medical costs have been extremely high so we might have reached the lifetime max had that still been in affect. So in that sense you could call my family a winner. Of course you have that same benefit and you might need it one day. It isn't like we have something you don't also have. Each of us have employer provided plans so we don't utilize the individual market exchanges. The wife will be transitioning to Medicare later this year.

For me it is more about all the people that will see their quality of life improve because of the health coverage they now have.

So explain to me how it is my responsibility to foot the bill for this for anyone beyond my immediate family.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I pay taxes that built and support a main hospital and several regional medical centers. I pay taxes that funds a modern emergency medical system. I've done my share without having to provide for anybody else's health insurance, unless you are going to start allowing me to claim them as dependents on my income taxes.

It's a crying damn shame that I sacrificed my body and time away from my family for so many years that even while retired I have to work to primarily pay taxes. Over 80% of my non-retirement income goes towards local, state and especially federal taxes. Perhaps if the government kept their grubby hands to themselves and quit stealing so much of people's hard earned money we wouldn't have to tax people so much to pay for something responsible people have been doing for themselves for years.

(12-29-2015 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 06:18 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  So explain to me how it is my responsibility to foot the bill for this for anyone beyond my immediate family.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Help me out, please. What part of that says that it is my responsibility to foot the bill for anyone beyond my immediate family?

I really wish people would stop the lie that you can't be seen by a doc without insurance. We see uninsured folks regularly in my office. All we ask is that they bring $100 to cover the visit.

But what do I know, I only provide the actual health care.

(12-29-2015 12:25 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 12:14 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 11:56 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 08:30 AM)Smaug Wrote:  More patients and fewer doctors.

Maybe one of you econ wizzes can explain to me how this makes everything better.

Thanks. I'll hang up and listen.

But you can't just make that statement in a vacuum. You need to show that all doctors were working at full capacity before the ACA. If there were openings and spaces available pre ACA, those would be filled first before issues started to arise. In addition, changes could be made to improve speed and access.

Actually, if one is advocating for the ACA, that person should first show there was adequate, underutilized capacity in the system before putting more demand into that system. What business, and healthcare is a business, builds an extreme amount of excess capacity into their business model? That would be foolish.

Redwingtom Wrote:Not to mention, that as soon as the ACA was passed that not everyone in America immediately made an appointment!

But, here we are, several years down the road. Have they used the system yet? If not, then the ACA is a failure, eh?

The is no doubt that the ACA is failing. There are still millions upon millions without health insurance. All the ACA has accomplished is effectively raised the cost of insurance for those paying customers in order to provide insurance for the "free" crowd. In the process, some that previously paid their way can no longer afford coverage. It's just shifting coverage from previous payers to covering non-payers.

There has been the largest reduction in the uninsured in the last 40 years. About 16 million uninsured have gained coverage. Less than 10% of the population is uninsured.

As far as the those that still aren't covered, There are about 33 million but only about 22 million are eligible and not covered.

1. 7 million are immigrants that are mostly, either undocumented or have been in the country with legal documentation for less than 5 years. Either of those two circumstances disqualifies them for Medicaid or the exchanges.

33-7=26 million
2. 3.8 million are in the medicaid gap. 19 states haven't expanded Medicaid. If they did expand they would be covered. Until they do you can subtract them from the possibility of getting covered.

33-7-3.8= 22.2 million
3. 7.7 million are young adults (that aren't poor or immigrants) age 19-34. The most coveted of all the uninsured. The 2016 enrollment for this group has gone up compared to 2015 so that is good news, given the importance of having a healthier mix.

33-7-3.8-7.7=14.5 million

4. The rest, about a quarter of them are children, some of them are adults that qualify for medicaid or medicare but aren't enrolled, some (about 7 million) earned less than 50k a year.

(12-29-2015 09:23 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 06:18 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-28-2015 09:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-28-2015 08:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  You are right about that because you have your Obamacare cheerleader uniform surgically attached to your body because you are one of the few winners from this boondoggle.

Well over the last few years my wife's medical costs have been extremely high so we might have reached the lifetime max had that still been in affect. So in that sense you could call my family a winner. Of course you have that same benefit and you might need it one day. It isn't like we have something you don't also have. Each of us have employer provided plans so we don't utilize the individual market exchanges. The wife will be transitioning to Medicare later this year.

For me it is more about all the people that will see their quality of life improve because of the health coverage they now have.

So explain to me how it is my responsibility to foot the bill for this for anyone beyond my immediate family.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

First off, those are ideals and not actual laws as it is the preamble to the constitution. Second, those ideals are given context by the laws of the constitution itself. The constitution shows ample laws that protect property rights and civil liberties. However, it does not state anything requiring the gov't to establish a welfare state. IMHO, you took the preamble out of context.

PUBLIC LAW 111 - 148

(12-29-2015 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 06:18 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  So explain to me how it is my responsibility to foot the bill for this for anyone beyond my immediate family.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Help me out, please. What part of that says that it is my responsibility to foot the bill for anyone beyond my immediate family?

The concept of a Social Contract (Compact).

(12-29-2015 11:32 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 06:18 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  So explain to me how it is my responsibility to foot the bill for this for anyone beyond my immediate family.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Help me out, please. What part of that says that it is my responsibility to foot the bill for anyone beyond my immediate family?

The concept of a Social Contract (Compact).

So you're just making **** up now to push your agenda. If that was an honest post it's sad that you've taught for 30 years.

We get it, you're one of the winners in this boondoggle.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

(12-29-2015 11:41 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 11:32 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 06:18 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  So explain to me how it is my responsibility to foot the bill for this for anyone beyond my immediate family.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Help me out, please. What part of that says that it is my responsibility to foot the bill for anyone beyond my immediate family?

The concept of a Social Contract (Compact).

So you're just making **** up now to push your agenda. If that was an honest post it's sad that you've taught for 30 years.

We get it, you're one of the winners in this boondoggle.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

I didn't make up the concept of a social contract, and it isn't an agenda. We just have different opinions regarding the issue. I can't help it if this makes you angry.

(12-29-2015 11:52 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 11:41 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 11:32 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Help me out, please. What part of that says that it is my responsibility to foot the bill for anyone beyond my immediate family?

The concept of a Social Contract (Compact).

So you're just making **** up now to push your agenda. If that was an honest post it's sad that you've taught for 30 years.

We get it, you're one of the winners in this boondoggle.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

I didn't make up the concept of a social contract, and it isn't an agenda. We just have different opinions regarding the issue. I can't help it if this makes you angry.

Is that honestly what you think was meant in the Constitution? That was actually a quote from the preamble which kind of changes the meaning, explaining why the "following" text was needed. Interestingly enough the Constitution said nothing about health or insurance.

It's sad that a history teacher can't understand the difference. You sound like the same idiots that take that and use it to justify welfare and entitlement programs.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

(12-29-2015 11:41 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 11:32 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 06:18 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  So explain to me how it is my responsibility to foot the bill for this for anyone beyond my immediate family.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Help me out, please. What part of that says that it is my responsibility to foot the bill for anyone beyond my immediate family?

The concept of a Social Contract (Compact).

So you're just making **** up now to push your agenda. If that was an honest post it's sad that you've taught for 30 years.

We get it, you're one of the winners in this boondoggle.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

Prime example of why I knew I wouldn't have any future in education because of the Godforsaken leftist idealists. Zero idea of personal responsibility and always willing to spend other people's money that their government overlords essentially took at gunpoint.

(12-29-2015 11:52 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 11:41 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 11:32 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Help me out, please. What part of that says that it is my responsibility to foot the bill for anyone beyond my immediate family?

The concept of a Social Contract (Compact).

So you're just making **** up now to push your agenda. If that was an honest post it's sad that you've taught for 30 years.

We get it, you're one of the winners in this boondoggle.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

I didn't make up the concept of a social contract, and it isn't an agenda. We just have different opinions regarding the issue. I can't help it if this makes you angry.

This is embarrassing. And some wonder why our public skools are failing so spectacularly.

My very own Mother and both grandmothers would be horrified.

Wow.

(12-29-2015 11:32 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 06:18 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  So explain to me how it is my responsibility to foot the bill for this for anyone beyond my immediate family.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Help me out, please. What part of that says that it is my responsibility to foot the bill for anyone beyond my immediate family?

The concept of a Social Contract (Compact).

So help me out some more, please, what part of that says anything about a social contract/compact?

(12-29-2015 11:03 PM)dfarr Wrote:  I really wish people would stop the lie that you can't be seen by a doc without insurance. We see uninsured folks regularly in my office. All we ask is that they bring $100 to cover the visit.

But what do I know, I only provide the actual health care.

What people?

(12-30-2015 05:49 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 11:32 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 06:18 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  So explain to me how it is my responsibility to foot the bill for this for anyone beyond my immediate family.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Help me out, please. What part of that says that it is my responsibility to foot the bill for anyone beyond my immediate family?

The concept of a Social Contract (Compact).

So help me out some more, please, what part of that says anything about a social contract/compact?

Do your own research if you don't grasp the connection.

(12-30-2015 03:43 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 11:52 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 11:41 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 11:32 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Help me out, please. What part of that says that it is my responsibility to foot the bill for anyone beyond my immediate family?

The concept of a Social Contract (Compact).

So you're just making **** up now to push your agenda. If that was an honest post it's sad that you've taught for 30 years.

We get it, you're one of the winners in this boondoggle.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

I didn't make up the concept of a social contract, and it isn't an agenda. We just have different opinions regarding the issue. I can't help it if this makes you angry.

This is embarrassing. And some wonder why our public skools are failing so spectacularly.

My very own Mother and both grandmothers would be horrified.

Wow.

It is always interesting when discussing a topic and the response becomes personal. I'm sorry if you don't like my response but wouldn't it be more productive if you offered insight into why the social contract wouldn't apply in this situation?

(12-30-2015 12:01 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 11:41 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 11:32 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-29-2015 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Help me out, please. What part of that says that it is my responsibility to foot the bill for anyone beyond my immediate family?

The concept of a Social Contract (Compact).

So you're just making **** up now to push your agenda. If that was an honest post it's sad that you've taught for 30 years.

We get it, you're one of the winners in this boondoggle.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

Prime example of why I knew I wouldn't have any future in education because of the Godforsaken leftist idealists. Zero idea of personal responsibility and always willing to spend other people's money that their government overlords essentially took at gunpoint.

That is a lot over the top.

(12-29-2015 11:12 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  There has been the largest reduction in the uninsured in the last 40 years. About 16 million uninsured have gained coverage. Less than 10% of the population is uninsured.

As far as the those that still aren't covered, There are about 33 million but only about 22 million are eligible and not covered.

1. 7 million are immigrants that are mostly, either undocumented or have been in the country with legal documentation for less than 5 years. Either of those two circumstances disqualifies them for Medicaid or the exchanges.

33-7=26 million
2. 3.8 million are in the medicaid gap. 19 states haven't expanded Medicaid. If they did expand they would be covered. Until they do you can subtract them from the possibility of getting covered.

33-7-3.8= 22.2 million
3. 7.7 million are young adults (that aren't poor or immigrants) age 19-34. The most coveted of all the uninsured. The 2016 enrollment for this group has gone up compared to 2015 so that is good news, given the importance of having a healthier mix.

33-7-3.8-7.7=14.5 million

4. The rest, about a quarter of them are children, some of them are adults that qualify for medicaid or medicare but aren't enrolled, some (about 7 million) earned less than 50k a year.

Several points.

First of all, we all heard the 40 million number of uninsured when this legislation was advocated. That includes your group 1, which was at least disingenuous and at at worst, deceitful.

Two, after passing this massive legislation, we've moved the percentage of uninsured from 15% to 10? And, we call that a success?

Third, again, they are insured, but this does not address access to health care. They previously had access. They may have less access now, actually.

Lastly, you have groups 3 and 4 that are choosing to not be covered. If they choose to not be, at what point should they no longer be used as pawns in the "uninsured" number? They have the opportunity and now don't take. Why is that any longer my concern?

For those that question my use of the concept of the "social contract" and in fact attacked me for it, here is some information regarding it. It isn't something I pulled out of the air. It isn't BS. It is basic history. I would hope you would appreciate that. The argument isn't IF the social contract is BS, but IF the social contract should be applied to the health law. So don't attack me, attack the application in this particular case.

Quote:Whenever the federal government expands its capabilities, it changes the nature of the social compact. Sometimes the changes are small, but sometimes, as in the New Deal or the civil rights era, the changes are big. And when the changes are big, courts are called on to legitimate the changes and ensure that they are consistent with our ancient Constitution. In this way, courts ratify significant revisions to the American social contract.

Quote:When the judiciary is staffed by people more or less allied with changes in governance, courts legitimate them fairly easily. But when the federal judiciary is staffed by people hostile to a new president's program, it often casts a skeptical eye on the innovations. Then there can be a protracted struggle over the terms of the new social contract--a struggle waged not only in the courts but also in the court of public opinion.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/arch...ct/259186/

Quote:What do Americans want from their health care system? Four fundamental goals have shaped our system. First, we want high quality health care that can provide the greatest benefits. Second, we want freedom of choice so that we can decide the “who, when, and where” for our health care. Third, we expect our health care to be affordable so that we have resources for all of the other things we need or want. Fourth, we want our fellow citizens to share in the costs and also benefits of health care (American College of Emergency Physicians, 2011).

With these common goals for our society, why is reform of the American health care system such a controversial issue? One probable reason is that there are significant differences in the priorities that Americans assign to these goals and important differences in beliefs and values. Social injustice occurs when all people are not treated with equal moral concern (Grace & Willis, 2012). The philosopher John Rawls (1971), in his book A Theory of Justice, placed our rights to liberty and justice on a new foundation of reason. His work revived the disciplines of political and ethical philosophy with his argument that a society in which the most fortunate help the least fortunate is not only a moral society, but a logical one (Knadig, 2011). He described the concept of a social contract, in which liberty is carefully balanced with individual rights and the overall good of society, with special emphasis on making the worst off as well off as they can be.

http://www.nursingworld.org/MainMenuCate...tives.html

Quote:VI. CONCLUSION
The effort to re-negotiate the American notion of a social contract to include
universal health care and to structure a template for achieving social justice
through the distribution of health care resources are noble goals. However,
rather than imposing a federal standard that restricts state autonomy in managing
health resources, the better position is to allow the states—through co-operative
federalism—to serve as laboratories to “try novel social and economic
experiments.”282

http://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewconte...xt=scholar

So, where do you draw the line? You want nanny state to tuck you in at night and read you a story?