Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 201
view profile
History
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percentPage 9 of 14    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14)
Well, again it's one of those problems any politician faces in many countries - and especially in the USA with it's corporate personhood (Google the Supreme Court's Santa Clara decision), the oligarchy (part and parcel of the American political landscape, as well as elsewhere) and especially the still unresolved issue of campaign financing/corporate lobbying (one thing all all parties seem to agree NEEDS real change...but also seem to agree that it's not happening anytime soon ) which helps to cement all of the above into one huge mess.

Also, this political concept of pork barreling (certainly NOT just an American problem) is added to the mix. Soliciting on the street gets you a jail sentence, soliciting in politics seems to get you......well...what you want.

I think that article brings out some good points, and I had some doubts that this thing would sail through unmolested simply thanks to the profits involved. I believe the intent was there, but the roadblocks and astroturfing (added to the economic problems existing) certainly helped to cause the mutation we are seeing.

If you check some earlier posts I made last year during the election campaign, I never believed that a "Canadian style" program could ever be seriously considered there - simply due to the cultural and historical memes that differ between our two countries and how we see things.

On top of that, thanks to the political polarization there, Obama doesn't have the power needed to force things through. That's another factor in all this. It takes both public opinion and the legislative numbers to have the force to drive it forward, and he is under heavy opposition from the right and the astroturfers in "molding" public opinion here. There's a TON of cash being spent to fight this tooth and nail from the health care industries major players - which should come as no surprise to anyone.

That's sad, because there is a real need here for serious reform on this. If you look at the increases that have occurred over the last decade or so, plus what's potentially ahead as a population ages demographically, something HAS to be done.

So one winds up at a crossroads, as one often seems to do in politics. Compromise is needed to get legislation passed (see above), but at what point does that compromise negate the original intent ?

Perhaps we will see some more changes before it's all set in stone, at least that's what I am hoping for.
 xxxDINOxxx
Joined: 8/12/2009
Msg: 202
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/7/2010 7:02:40 AM

I think that article brings out some good points, and I had some doubts that this thing would sail through unmolested simply thanks to the profits involved. I believe the intent was there, but the roadblocks and astroturfing (added to the economic problems existing) certainly helped to cause the mutation we are seeing.

If you check some earlier posts I made last year during the election campaign, I never believed that a "Canadian style" program could ever be seriously considered there - simply due to the cultural and historical memes that differ between our two countries and how we see things.


^^ Exactly. I agree. It's very unfortunate for those of us who desire it to be otherwise, but as we've all seen by now even this attempted mild healthcare...."tune-up" (I don't want to say reform because I agree with Howard Fineman that it's not a fundamental systemic reform).... has just barely been possible due to the ingrained feelings of about half the country for starters, combined with the excessive corporate influence in DC (in this case private insurance , big pharm, etc).
 Ready4SomethingFun
Joined: 3/17/2008
Msg: 203
view profile
History
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/7/2010 9:50:49 AM

It's very unfortunate for those of us who desire it to be otherwise


Ya know what I'd do if i desired what another country already has? I'd go to that country and become a citizen of it instead of trying to manipulate things to my liking in a country in which the majority are clearly not supporting it. But I guess that is just some misguided clear thinking on my part.
 xxxDINOxxx
Joined: 8/12/2009
Msg: 204
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/7/2010 7:52:13 PM
Ya know what I'd do if i desired what another country already has? I'd go to that country and become a citizen of it instead of trying to manipulate things to my liking in a country in which the majority are clearly not supporting it. But I guess that is just some misguided clear thinking on my part.


I'm not trying to manipulate or change it, personally. A gov't elected by a majority is trying to do it. If "the majority" were so vehemently against Obama touching healthcare, when he clearly made it plain that he would during his campaign, then why was he so relatively easily elected ??

Generally speaking , the country is divided on these kinds of social issues on a nearly 50/50 basis, sometimes closer to 60/40, but still it's not some huge glaring percentile difference where American liberals are ridiculously outnumbered as though they were members of some radical extremist group or something.

A large proportion of the population is liberal (in varying degrees) and an equally large proportion is conservative (in varying degrees). Which proportion should relocate to another country ASAP is therefore a matter of which side you're on.

For example for me, if nearly every Republican announced his and her impending repatriation to a different country (although I'm not sure which country in the known world would actually be a good fit for a bunch of American Republicans and Right-Libertarian-types), I would find this no cause for upset personally. I mean I wouldn't fight to convince them to stay, or "preserve the Union", saying things such as, "oh come on, at the end of the day we're all fellow countrymen..." and all that. So I can actually understand where you're coming from.

I'm the first-generation in my family even born here; I don't feel as deep an attachment to these kinds of people who I disagree so vehemently with politically, nor do I feel any great bond of "fellow countryman" or even common history with them. Yes we dwell within the same borders, and we pay taxes to the same fed'l gov't, but in many ways that is about where the similarity ends. That's probably inherent to a point in these modern societies that are "melting pots" (some people are not fully "melted" yet).

So I admit there is certain legislation which , even if I do not fully agree with its every aspect, I am happy to see pass simply because I know it's driving that "other side" crazy. Politics of spite or dislike at that point, I guess. So that's one of the main reasons (aside from the 30 million uninsured it's actually helping) that I will be happy the day Obama finally puts his signature on the health care "tune-up" bill.
 Imported_labor
Joined: 3/7/2008
Msg: 205
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/8/2010 4:51:01 AM

Ya know what I'd do if i desired what another country already has? I'd go to that country and become a citizen of it instead of trying to manipulate things to my liking in a country in which the majority are clearly not supporting it. But I guess that is just some misguided clear thinking on my part.


Besides what Dino posted already, we should take into account the meaning of the words that we use. There is no reason to use the word "manipulate" to accuse president Obama when he is trying to deliver one of the key elements of his political platform. He was elected by the majority and it is his political duty to try to deliver for the country all the major changes that are needed to improve the living conditions for the majority of the people.

If you want to talk about "manipulation," go back to the years of G. W. Bush. When the people didn't like the idea of going into a an unnecessary war with Iraq, he lied and cheated and manufactured fake evidence to force people to allow him to invade a country that hadn't attacked the USA. Now, that was "manipulation."
 Ready4SomethingFun
Joined: 3/17/2008
Msg: 206
view profile
History
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/8/2010 6:48:20 AM
I'm not trying to say everyone should pack it up and move, I'm saying I would if what I wanted was already available elsewhere.

Obama did campaign on a platform of change to the healthcare system. No argument there. But when that change was proposed, the majority have spoken and said they do not like that proposed change. So therefore, another proposal should be brought to the table that is acceptable to the majority of the people. Everyone I know is ready for change to the healthcare system. But almost everyone I know is not ready for the kind of change the democrats in office are forcefeeding us. And therein lies the problem.

And no, I don't want to talk about Bush. He isn't in office anymore. It is a difference of opinion about the Iraq war and you don't know anymore than I do what really happened with that situation. It's all opinions, and Obama chooses not to go there (do you think possibly he knows something we don't?--he is, after all, the smartest man on earth, according to the democrats) so everyone else should let it rest, too. It's done and too late to cry about it now, but this healthcare monstrosity isn't. But it soon will be, and I guess you guys will enjoy it 3-5 years from now, when it finally starts coming into action. Unless some really smart people find the loopholes and repeal the stinkin' thing.
 Imported_labor
Joined: 3/7/2008
Msg: 207
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/8/2010 11:50:32 AM
In the end the voters will decide if their representatives or the president did the right thing by passing a health reform law.

One politician that may have reason to be nervous is the one that did as much as he could to sabotage the changes that would have helped the majority of the people that need to have access to health insurance that they can afford. The ratings for Joe Lieberman suggest that he may be ripe for defeat in the next election.


Lieberman's Approval Ratings Tank In Connecticut

Sen. Joseph Lieberman's (I-Conn.) role in upending health care negotiations is costing him dearly at home.

A new poll by Public Policy Polling has the Independent senator losing support in his home state, not just among Democrats but among independents and even Republicans as well.

More than 80 percent (81 percent) of Democrats now say they disapprove of the job Lieberman is doing with only 14 percent approving. Among Republicans, 48 percent disapprove of the senator with just 39 approving. And among independents, 61 percent disapprove of Lieberman's antics with just 32 percent approving.

"It all adds up to a 25% approval rating with 67% of his constituents giving him bad marks," the study concludes. "Barack Obama's approval rating with Connecticut Republicans is higher than Lieberman's with the state's Democrats."

Lieberman, undoubtedly, will interpret the results as a vindication of his maverick nature -- yet another example of just how unwilling he is to tie himself to any particular ideological camp. In actuality, it seems to be more a reflection of just how out of touch the senator has grown with the constituents he represents.

Among voters who support the health care bill 87% disapprove of how Lieberman handled it with only 10% supporting it. But by voting for the final product after getting it watered down he also managed to earn the unhappiness of constituents opposed to the bill, 52% of whom say they disapprove of what Lieberman did to 33% in support.
Overall just 19% of voters in the state say they like what Lieberman did on the issue with 68% opposed.

Lieberman is not up for re-election until 2012 and there is some speculation as to whether he will mount another bid. If he does, there will be plenty of questions raised about who exactly constitutes his base. It's hard to imagine Democrats in the state willingly turning over their nomination to the man who spurned them on the president's chief legislative item (in addition to campaigning for John McCain in the 2008 presidential election). But Republicans, who are well aware of Lieberman's largely progressive stance on social issues, aren't necessarily enamored with him as well.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20100107/cm_huffpost/414666

The republicans may very well lose their most trusted ally in the struggle to preserve the status quo.
 xxxDINOxxx
Joined: 8/12/2009
Msg: 208
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/8/2010 12:13:36 PM
^^ Personally I think that guy's fried his political career either way at this point, he must realize that on some level. And I don't just say that because I have never been able to stand him. I mean, he's going to be hated by almost all Democrats now. Probably many or most Republicans won't really have him either. What kind of "Independent" base does he really think he's cultivating? Politically "Independent" Orthodox Jews against Medicare expansion, or ?? I don't think that will be enough to keep him in office in Conn. Maybe if he were running for some local office in Crown Heights or something, based on a Right-wing pro-Israel stance and opposition to public options, but not in Conn. He's a goner; just like Al Gore was a goner when he put this millstone around his neck as a VP choice back in '00.
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 209
view profile
History
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/10/2010 5:33:22 PM
I think the reasons for the problems here can indeed be traced back to our lovely little friend Bill Krystol, the neo-con's favorite spokesperson.


Some see the potency of this move. Back in 1993, when the Clintons proposed a much more ambitious plan, Republican strategist Bill Kristol wrote a famous memo arguing that the Right should not negotiate or propose an alternative but should simply do all it could to kill the bill. In it, he shrewdly homed in on the danger as he saw it: "The long-term political effects of a successful Clinton healthcare bill will be even worse - much worse (than its medical consequences). It will re-legitimise middle-class dependency for 'security' on government spending and regulation. It will revive the reputation of the party that spends and regulates, the Democrats, as the generous protector of middle-class interests. And it will at the same time strike a punishing blow against Republican claims to defend the middle class by restraining government."

I understand this sentiment and, given my libertarian leanings, tend to resist government intervention when it is unnecessary. I opposed the Clinton plan as too centrally dictated and bureaucratic. In an ideal world, I'd like to scrap the US system entirely, sever the connection between employment and health insurance, allow individuals to buy insurance from competing healthcare exchanges, and leave the rest to fee-for-service medicine. But it is a political fact that this won't happen in America.

Obama's speech last week was therefore directed at people like me: suspicious of change and government, but aware the system is both inefficient and at some point cruel, even immoral. He played the Burkean card: "I believe it makes more sense to build on what works and fix what doesn't, rather than try to build an entirely new system from scratch." He dangled the prospect of relief: "As soon as I sign this bill, it will be against the law for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick, or water it down when you need it most."

And here's the best pitch for universal healthcare to conservatives in a long time: "That large-heartedness - that concern and regard for the plight of others - is not a partisan feeling. It is not a Republican or a Democratic feeling. It, too, is part of the American character."

The proposals are nobody's ideal, but they do create healthcare exchanges that could develop into real arenas for consumer choice; they do remove a huge amount of insecurity and anxiety from many middle-class Americans; and they amount to the passage of universal coverage in a largely private system.

If this passes, Obama will become a hero to the Democratic Party. And if it works, he will be a hero to everyone who, like me, once feared sickness because it meant potential bankruptcy.

The Sunday Times

www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26067359-26397,00.html


This is a political struggle, at it's base, and one the Republicans cannot afford to lose, for many reasons. If it works, then they lose support in the middle class. If it works, they have to run against a political powerhouse. If it works, then their corporate backers stand to lose huge amounts of profit.

Look at what happened to Clinton, when he tried it. We see the same pattern of political astroturfing, and all out attempts to discredit him with every arrow possible - including all sorts of personal nut job attacks. That this pattern repeats itself should surprise no one.

If they cannot defeat it, then their job is to make it as ineffective as possible, in order to use it as a political weapon later.
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 210
view profile
History
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/10/2010 7:14:02 PM
Well, here's Krystol's vision of how to defeat the Obama driven health care reform, from July 2009.


Go for the kill … This is the week to highlight every problem, every terrible provision, in the Democratic bills: from taxes and spending to government control and rationing to federal funding for abortion and government-required death-with-dignity counseling sessions for the elderly. Throw the kitchen sink at the legislation now on the table, drive a stake through its heart (I apologize for the mixed metaphors), and kill it.

Then opponents can say, of course we do want to pass sensible health reform. But to do so, we need to start over.

So the constructive part of the message would be: Start Over. We're not giving up on health reform. Far from it. But the only way to pass health reform is first to get rid of the misbegotten efforts now before Congress. The only way to pass health reform is to start over in the fall. The Obama plan wouldn't go into effect until 2013 anyway (except the tax increases, which would kick in in 2011). We have plenty of time to work next year on sensible and targeted health reform in a bipartisan way. But first we need to get rid of Obamacare. Now is the time to do so.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/07/kristol_kill_it_and_start_over.asp


After eight years of Republican rule where they did zero to address the need of reform there, now their intent to to kill ANY attempt - because they need more time to think about it ?

They'd rather see people die, and lose insurance, than lose any political chance they have of losing a vote.

Kristol clear, and in his own words from the "vampire killer" himself.
 sum1reel
Joined: 6/5/2005
Msg: 211
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/10/2010 8:11:05 PM
^


After eight years of Republican rule where they did zero to address the need of reform there, now their intent to to kill ANY attempt - because they need more time to think about it ?

They'd rather see people die, and lose insurance, than lose any political chance they have of losing a vote.


win or lose, the Reps have certainly shown their true colors (as did Lieberman) in the battle for healthcare reform.

Their interests are to protect the very profitable insurance industry and to make sure the status-quo remains intact such as that they can continue reaping in enormously obscene profits, that are drawn from what is in effect, a captive audience!....kinda like an oil well that never runs outta oil!

As someone who has often voted republican.... it now amazes me why anyone in the middle/working class would ever wanna vote for these self serving basterds....but, every so often, the Dems find a way to get the voting public pissed off at them...much like they did in the y2k elections.......lack of common sense and foresight has always been the dem's Achilles heel!
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 212
view profile
History
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/11/2010 1:21:56 AM
And here's the part that should not be forgotten :



The Left's Idiocy on Health Reform

To be sure, the bill that emerged from the Senate has problems. But it is landmark social legislation that guarantees and subsidizes health care coverage for 30 million Americans who don't have it now. Yes, this means a lot of new customers for the insurance companies — but the insurers will face strict new regulations, and many of their new customers will be people they refused to cover in the past. Ultimately, it means an annual income redistribution of $200 billion to help the working poor pay for insurance, which is why Republicans oppose the bill. But Jacob Hacker, the leading promoter of the public option, favors it. Every Democratic Senator, including those like Ohio's Sherrod Brown who have impeccable liberal records, favors it.

The denizens of the left blogosphere consider themselves the Democratic Party's base. But they are not. For Democrats, as opposed to Republicans, the wing is not the base; the legions of loyal African Americans, union members, Jews, women and Latinos are. In the end, the sillier left-village practitioners are stoking the same populist exaggeration — the idea that Washington is controlled by crooks and sellouts — that conservative strategists like Bill Kristol believe will bring the Republicans back to power. The perversity of this is beyond comprehension.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1950575,00.html?loomia_si=t0:a16:g2:r3:c0.0737716:b29678640&xid=Loomia


So it's a problem shared by both the right and the left, and it's based in politics.

The fact remains that 30 million Americans will get much needed insurance, that insurance companies will have to actually spend money on treatments they previously avoided paying for (while increasing their profits) and the working poor will finally be free of the nightmare of living and working in America without health care insurance.

Who knows how many people's lives will be saved, and made better ?

In a nation that spends literally hundreds of billions to defend American lives from foreign threats, why is there such reluctance to save American lives from the ravages of a threat that no doubt kills more Americans than all foreign threats combined annually - disease and illness ?

Compared to what was originally proposed, it's a compromise solution, and you can thank the two party system for that.

The question that should be asked is why the Republicans spent the last eight years allowing it to happen, and now have fought this effort tooth and nail at every step.

Where was that concern for addressing the problem when they were in power ?
 4rumninja
Joined: 11/30/2009
Msg: 213
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/11/2010 6:13:01 AM
right the evil republicans are to blame for everything because they dont want Government Run Health care...Government mandates for those who can pay if not fines and more..pay into the system for 3 or 4 years at Thousands per year without receiving any benefits..those with the most costly preexisting conditions right away without paying a dime into system....IRS Enforcing Government Mandate.....IRS..as if they dont have enough unchecked power already....
At the Rate Obama is going no one will have Health Insurance until this is passed because he has not created any Jobs and those who have Insurance now through their employers have lost and will lose their insurance when they lose their jobs since there is no Economic recovery going on right now....
Obama administration Motto no Crisis should be wasted..if there isnt one create one so that the Government can take over ...
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 214
view profile
History
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/11/2010 9:03:16 AM
Funny how both the AMA and AARP both support this bill, yet Republicans can't ?



HOUSTON – The American Medical Association (AMA) today announced support for concurrent passage of H.R. 3962 and H.R. 3961, U.S. House of Representatives health system reform bills.

“The time to make health system reform a reality is now,” said J. James Rohack, AMA president. "These two bills were introduced together, and they need to be passed together. Both are essential to achieving meaningful health system reform this year."

“On balance, H.R. 3962, The Affordable Health Care for America Act, is consistent with our principles of pluralism, freedom of choice, freedom of physician practice and universal access. It will significantly expand health insurance coverage to Americans to empower patient and physician decision making; institute meaningful insurance market reforms; make substantial investments in quality; institute prevention and wellness initiatives; provide incentives to states that adopt certificate of merit and/or early offer liability reforms, and reduce administrative burdens.”

“H.R. 3962 is not the perfect bill, and we will continue to advocate for changes, but it goes a long way toward expanding access to high-quality affordable health coverage for all Americans, and it would make the system better for patients and physicians,” Dr. Rohack said. "This is not the last step but the next step toward health system reform. We will remain actively engaged with patients, physicians, Congress and the administration to ensure that the final bill results in marked improvements to our health system."

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/health-system-reform/ama-supports-house-bills.shtml
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So does the AARP (American Association of Retired Persons):


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“This morning the Senate brought us closer to meaningful health care reform than we have ever been before. Passage of the Senate health care reform bill clears the way for Congress to enact legislation in the coming weeks that will protect and strengthen Medicare, ensure millions more Americans can get affordable health coverage and sharply curtail discriminatory insurance company practices that keep those most in need out of the system.

“The bill passed by the Senate makes needed progress to prevent coverage denials due to health status and limit insurance companies from charging older Americans much more for coverage because of their age. It also begins to close the dangerous gap in Medicare drug coverage known as the doughnut hole, and Senate leaders have committed that a final bill will close the gap entirely by 2019, in keeping with the President’s pledge. In addition, the Senate bill adds important new Medicare benefits, like free preventive care, and encourages states to provide more home and community-based long-term care services and supports instead of costlier institutional care.

“AARP thanks the Senate for advancing this critical legislation. We look forward to working with members of both chambers during the conference committee to improve this legislation and enact a final package that is even stronger so that America’s health care system finally meets the needs of our members and all older Americans.”

http://www.aarp.org/aarp/presscenter/pressrelease/articles/aarp_thanks_senateforpassinghealthcarereform.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So we have two very large and powerful groups that are backing this legislation, and speaking out on it's benefits.

On the other side, we have Bill Kristol and the Republicans - who want to kill it and have more time to think about it.
 xxxDINOxxx
Joined: 8/12/2009
Msg: 215
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/11/2010 9:13:46 AM
It's going to pass either way, IMO. So Kristol and his Republicans are just going to have to suck it up and deal with it. Like I've said here before, Obama was elected by a majority, and relatively easily over John McCain. He had made his intent to overhaul health care well known during his campaign. His ideas were easily accessible on the Internet. If "the majority" was so against all these ideas, why was he elected? And if they only voted for him because he was not a Republican (although understandable after the past 7 yrs) then they are the epitome of dumb uninformed voters who don't know what they're getting (they can go on all kinds of websites I'm sure to buy BS off the Internet all day long, but they can't read carefully through the information on a presidential candidate's website during his campaign???). The Democrats who hold a majority in Congress were likewise duly elected.

Some on the Right make it sound, IMO, as though they are having all of this "forced on them" all of a sudden, via some undemocratic, "unAmerican" "process" where they've had no access to the ballot and so on. Come on already! These people won legitimate elections! Now they are setting into motion their earlier stated ideas for health care reform (or at least some version of their ideas for health care reform). This is called, "majority rules". It seems Bill Kristol and the Right can only comprehend that notion when there's a Bush / Cheney in office.
 4rumninja
Joined: 11/30/2009
Msg: 216
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/11/2010 10:37:19 AM
its interesting how a Democratic system works people vote ...they have a right to change their minds...if it was about what Americans want then the Democrats would be guided by the polling....getting endorsements from select groups is no way indicative of the will of the people..Big Organizations much like the Government are run by a few individuals and make decisions that are often contrary to the will of the people they represent...

Because people voted for Obama doesnt make it right for the Government to Force people to Buy anything.....FORCE people...MANDATE ....Reform is a good thing but Forcing people to purchase things is kind of Dictatorial...next we will be forced to buy Government approved Cars then Government approved Houses...Slippery Slope
 xxxDINOxxx
Joined: 8/12/2009
Msg: 217
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/11/2010 8:54:12 PM
We're already forced to purchase auto insurance. Where were the "tea parties" over that "dictatorial reform" whenever exactly it came about?? You know not everyone can afford it. And there's no gov't-offered option for those who can't. Yet somehow we all get by. Those who get caught not having it get an extra ticket for it and eventually have to show they've got some kind of coverage. It has not remotely led to any moves towards "gov't approved cars".....

Nobody's talking about bankrupting anyone through these fines (these fines are all relatively small, and they don't get larger until the 3rd or 4th yr of the "offense" -- and even then it's not a ridiculous amount ; simply save what you'd pay on premiums if you insist on not getting any because there's a mandate, and you'll still be up ). Nobody's going to be throwing anyone into jail for not having insurance.

Actually there's more restraints on auto insurance and autos than there will be with the health insurance. You can't buy a new car, or a used car, from a dealer unless you can show proof of insurance. You can't properly register a car that you buy privately unless you have proof of insurance. That's all "dictatorial".

What happened to the days of one American just handing another American a big wad of sweaty cash for a gas-guzzling muscle car and then taking it out on the open road?? Now he has to wear a seat belt, by law, the car has to have its emissions tested, by law, has to meet at least some minimal MPG requirement and can't use leaded gas, and the driver has to prove he has purchased insurance before he can get it registered ?? ....... that's it, there's no more real America....

A lot of this sentiment is just because people do not fully understand what's in the bill, what its implications are going to be for them personally (in many cases -- for instance if you already have insurance you like and can afford -- nothing), and they have bought into total BS scare tactics put into the mass media from the Right.
 sum1reel
Joined: 6/5/2005
Msg: 218
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/11/2010 9:32:07 PM

Because people voted for Obama doesnt make it right for the Government to Force people to Buy anything.....FORCE people...MANDATE ....Reform is a good thing but Forcing people to purchase things is kind of Dictatorial...next we will be forced to buy Government approved Cars then Government approved Houses...Slippery Slope


Huh?????......, the Gov. forces me to: buy stamps to mail letters...to pay into social security (which i might never see).....pay the IRS....pay tolls to use roads that i'm already taxed for...now you say we shouldn't be forced to buy insurance?......having health insurance is like having car insurance.....it is a civic responsibility!


next we will be forced to buy Government approved Cars then Government approved Houses.


You can't buy a car that ISN'T gov approved!....all cars sold must meet specific emissions standards!.........................same goes for houses, they must meet gov building code standards!
 wisguyingb
Joined: 1/5/2008
Msg: 219
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/12/2010 5:26:44 PM

Huh?????......, the Gov. forces me to: buy stamps to mail letters...to pay into social security (which i might never see).....pay the IRS....pay tolls to use roads that I'm already taxed for...now you say we shouldn't be forced to buy insurance?......having health insurance is like having car insurance.....it is a civic responsibility!


The Government does not "force" you to buy stamps. You choose to buy them to use the postal service. Please explain how they force you to use the postal service? What penalty does the Government impose on you if you don't buy stamps?

You are not "forced" to pay into social security as long as you don't work. But yes if you work then you are forced to pay into the Social Security ponzi scheme.

The Government does not "force" you to pay your income taxes. You pay them through voluntary compliance. The Government can't make laws that require you to say or do anything that will or could put you in jail. That would be a violation of our Fifth Amendment rights. The fifth amendment protects you from being forced to incriminate yourself. To "plead the Fifth" is to refuse to answer a question because the response could provide self-incriminating evidence of an illegal conduct punished by fines, penalties or forfeiture. The bottom line is that you don't have to say or do anything that could incriminate yourself. So of course Income Tax "law" is written as voluntary.....

The below link is to a video in which Senator Harry Reid talks about the voluntary compliance tax system we have. Unfortunately its not really 'vounaltry' since the IRS will use force if you don't "voluntary" file your taxes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7mRSI8yWwg

You only pay the road toll if you use the road. And you are not "forced" to buy car insurance. You can choose not to drive a car. Before 2010 we people living in Wisconsin did not have to buy any auto insurance. In 2009 Governor Doyle and the Democrats in Wisconsin have changed that. Now auto insurance rates are going up roughly 20%......

The below is a older article about the Doyle insurance plan before it became law. Thanks to Gov Doyle we went from one of the most affordable states for auto insurance to one of the most expensive.....
http://www.sunprairiestar.com/main.asp?SectionID=2&SubSectionID=2&ArticleID=2816
 sum1reel
Joined: 6/5/2005
Msg: 220
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/12/2010 9:09:04 PM

The Government does not "force" you to buy stamps.


yeah, you are right Pal.......just like nobody forces me to wear a coat in sub-zero temperatures......see how far i'll get before i freeze in my tracks!


You are not "forced" to pay into social security as long as you don't work.


yeah so the take home message is "don't work".... ...and i'll live off the fruits of love!


The Government does not "force" you to pay your income taxes. You pay them through voluntary compliance..................................................................................... Unfortunately its not really 'vounaltry' since the IRS will use force if you don't "voluntary" file your taxes.


So i guess its safe to say that we are being "FORCED" to volunteer, eh????



You only pay the road toll if you use the road. And you are not "forced" to buy car insurance. You can choose not to drive a car.


so i guess i'll just keep my car as an ornament parked on the front lawn......and i'll put a manikin in it so i'll have the coolest lawn jockey in the whole neighborhood!
 Montreal_Guy
Joined: 3/8/2004
Msg: 221
view profile
History
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/12/2010 9:23:23 PM
One question, from a foreigners perspective, is how come government run healthcare is so great for the US military and government workers - especially everyone in the judicial, legislative, and executive branches. Those last three make really great salaries, as well.

No one in those groups seems to have any complaint whatsover. What makes all those people so special ?
 sum1reel
Joined: 6/5/2005
Msg: 222
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/13/2010 7:11:57 AM
^

because it is multi-tiered..............the brand of that the politicians afford themselves (at our expense) is not the kind that would be offered to the general public......the brand that you get in the Military is okay as long as you remain enlisted......but once you leave, you then get funneled into the VA system..... which unlike conventional coverage, does not allow you to freely see your own MD....you have to go to their own clinics which is not considered to be a desirable place by most pple since you always have to go thru a 'gatekeeper' and there may be a considerable waiting time for follow-up/specialty visits.

the worst brand is what you have with those on public assistance......though many services are covered, access to good practitioners is greatly limited because of poor re-reimbursement rates to private MDs (because many just don't accept such a plan).

this is what some pple are worried about and this is what opponents of reform have played on......they've used scare tactics to spook the public into thinking that they'd be herded into such a plan (if they won't or can't afford private insurance) and be stuck in it!

there is some reason for concern because our government programs have a reputation for being wasteful and inefficient.........and nobody wants to deal with gov officials, especially as it concerns their healthcare. The challenge for the feds would be to erect a whole new health system free of waste and inefficiency....it can be done, as we already have a working model in our senior Medicare program, but doing so would be very expensive!
 xxxDINOxxx
Joined: 8/12/2009
Msg: 223
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/13/2010 8:32:23 AM
The real problem , IMO, which the US faces on this issue that makes it a bit different than Canada or much of western or northern Europe is sheer size of the population. How many people does Canada have total? How many does the US have total? How about Sweden and the US? Or England and the US?

As well as the extremely heterogeneous makeup of the people all dwelling within the borders of the US (which is not to say that those other countries are homogeneous -- far from it, but at least in the case of much of Europe they are a bit closer to being so than the US is certainly).

Beyond that there are simply cultural differences which (clearly -- as we have seen from the furor over merely trying to fix or touch-up the existing system) do not readily allow for it. The American "mentality" (not speaking of individuals naturally but, "on a whole") is simply quite different in a few important ways compared to the Canadian (or European) mentality.

This is a country where at least half (probably slightly more than half) the population inherently distrusts or dislikes the idea of a large gov't doing almost anything "for" them (or "to" them, in their view). There is a lot of distrust of gov't; it runs even deeper in the South. These are people reared on the American "pioneer" mentality (or exile-from-another-country mentality) and the inherent ethic amongst many of them is to live away from gov't , as much as possible, to remain wary of gov't, armed against it ("just in case"), and so forth. Canadians I don't think are the same.

Europeans definitely are not (on the whole...... with the possible exception of one group that I can personally speak on -- southerly Italians; my father is an immigrant from there originally, and he says that this is exactly why a lot of the southern Italians , when they became Americans, wound up being more like "conservatives" -- because they are from a country where gov't is viewed by almost everyone as inherently corrupt or even dangerous at times, where people just want to be left alone by the gov't in their own small villages and such, where they actually think highly of someone who's "furba" [slang term for "cunning"] enough to evade some taxes, and where religion [Catholicism] is still highly important).

No, enacting a single-payer system for instance -- while I personally would not be ideologically against it if we had a different situation here -- would require not only a near complete disruption of the current health care delivery system that has been in place for decades but then a complete rebuilding of it from the ground up, really.

It would be a logistical nightmare, if not impossibility, in a country of this size with people who don't even all understand the same languages in some cases (a large number of whom are technically here illegally -- Mexicans , and Eastern Europeans / Russians, most notably around Chicago).
 eeeo4U
Joined: 6/25/2007
Msg: 224
view profile
History
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/13/2010 11:14:54 AM
That last post made a lot of sense. I can speak of my mother's family who came from Sicily, where the Mafia achieved the power and influence it had because it was considered an acceptable alternative to a greedy, corrupt and vicious government as exemplified by Mussolini. The system here is too unwieldy for a single payer system to work and many Americans expect, no, demand high quality even if they are unable or unwilling to pay for it...
 laxref41
Joined: 7/20/2008
Msg: 225
Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent
Posted: 1/16/2010 9:18:24 AM
"This is a political struggle, at it's base, and one the Republicans cannot afford to lose, for many reasons. If it works, then they lose support in the middle class. If it works, they have to run against a political powerhouse. If it works, then their corporate backers stand to lose huge amounts of profit. If they cannot defeat it, then their job is to make it as ineffective as possible, in order to use it as a political weapon later.
how come government run healthcare is so great for the US military and government workers - especially everyone in the judicial, legislative, and executive branches. Those last three make really great salaries, as well. No one in those groups seems to have any complaint whatsover. What makes all those people so special ?"

There is nothing special about these groups you mention...

Montreal Guy is absolutely correct about why the Republicans are against health care reform... as they will be about ANYTHING Obama proposes... simply stated the GOP truly believes that it seeks what is in the best interests of the United States... but the fact is, the GOP has been the party in predominant power for the last 28 years and their programs and initiatives are what have brought us to this situation... for not only health care but most other aspects of our economy and foreign policy. When historic fact shows the philosophy has miserably failed, why continue to follow it? Some folks just fear change and they don't want to admit they've been wrong.
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent