world

Obamacare: More than 10 million uninsured signed up

191 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2014 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

191 Comments
Login to comment

Shocking to hear that millions of additional Americans are signing up for more of Obama's free money. It will be utopia once everyone can quit working and have the government take care of them.

-17 ( +9 / -27 )

Free is for me!

But I prefer to be an asset to society. Not a liability. So, I work hard, keep my job, have very good medical insurance and pay lots of taxes! I donate to various charities generously, help others, volunteer time to various causes when time permits, don't drink excessively, don't do drugs, do not sleep till noon, don't smoke, don't steal.

My profile makes me a supporter of Obamacare 'FINANCIALLY' of those traits of mine the recipients would list opposite.

Sad also I don't look forward to my deductibles when the employer mandate will kick in. a couple to several thousand dollars annually I have heard. As I said I have good insurance, I made sure when I chose a career and worked for it.

0 ( +9 / -10 )

Shocking to hear that millions of additional Americans are signing up for more of Obama's free money.

Sigh. Americans are so hung up on heath care being a privilege, when they miss the fact that it should be a right. And in believing the brainwashing propaganda they are fed, all they are doing is making the insurance companies more money, for providing them with a lower standard of care. It's bewildering.

12 ( +21 / -9 )

"when they miss the fact that it should be a right."

A right! So doctors and nurses educate themselves at great expense, time and effort to provide that RIGHT for free?

-10 ( +9 / -19 )

It's never free. Governments that care about the health and welfare of their people provide this right using tax dollars.

9 ( +17 / -8 )

Sigh. Americans are so hung up on heath care being a privilege, when they miss the fact that it should be a right. And in believing the brainwashing propaganda they are fed, all they are doing is making the insurance companies more money, for providing them with a lower standard of care. It's bewildering.

It is a privilege?? Did we have healthcare 150 years ago? How about being able to drive a car, is it a right? The funny thing about Europeans that cracks me up is, you guys keep thinking that BS that your countries can keep sustaining these huge entitlements, in a stagnant economy, Europe can't maintain to dish out these lavish social benifits, not for much longer. Another Greece is not that far off for the Europeans.

It's never free. Governments that care about the health and welfare of their people provide this right using tax dollars.

All the while, the governments squeeze the people more and more for taxes because of a staggering slow economy, also with long lunch breaks, insanely long work vacations, when do Europeans work?

-8 ( +10 / -18 )

It's never free. Governments that care about the health and welfare of their people provide this right using tax dollars.

So you support income redistribution. Educated and motivated will pay for the uneducated and lazy.

-6 ( +7 / -13 )

It is a privilege??

No, it's a right.

Did we have healthcare 150 years ago?

150 years ago, you had slavery, and it was considered a right. Are you sure you want to use that time period as a reference for rights?

How about being able to drive a car, is it a right?

No.

The funny thing about Europeans that cracks me up is, you guys keep thinking that BS that your countries can keep sustaining these huge entitlements, in a stagnant economy, Europe can't maintain to dish out these lavish social benifits, not for much longer.

The funny thing about Americans that cracks me up is that you seem to think 'Europe' is a country.

It's never free. Governments that care about the health and welfare of their people provide this right using tax dollars.

All the while, the governments squeeze the people more and more for taxes because of a staggering slow economy, also with long lunch breaks, insanely long work vacations, when do Europeans work?

That's just too ridiculous of a statement to even bother with.

Anyways, I'll finish it up with this. Check out the ranking of the US here: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jun/17/nhs-health

8 ( +16 / -8 )

Looks like Republicans were wrong. Funny that.

10 ( +18 / -8 )

Looks like Republicans were wrong. Funny that.

There isn't enough space on the internet to list the things they've been wrong about. I'd be more interested to know if they've ever been right this century.

7 ( +14 / -7 )

And a late term abortion of a fully formed fetus in a healthy pregnancy is also a "right"?

-16 ( +3 / -19 )

And a late term abortion of a fully formed fetus in a healthy pregnancy is also a "right"?

Use of extremes don't make an argument, they just show the lack of one.

14 ( +19 / -5 )

But I prefer to be an asset to society. Not a liability. So, I work hard, keep my job, have very good medical insurance and pay lots of taxes!

By your own standards, you won't be an asset to society if you do all that but the day comes when you can't comfortably meet your medical bills. It happens to a lot of Americans, and can lead to medical bankruptcy, which is both common, and a big proportion of all personal bankruptcies.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-trumble-medical-bankruptcy-20140723-story.html

So unless you are extraordinarily well buffered, you could do all the things you say you do that make you a good citizen, and still face financial ruin because of a medical emergency (or, as often happens, a series of them) that you couldn't really have planned for.

I know, you'd say your insurance company will cover all that. Try them.

2 ( +9 / -7 )

A right to have healthcare imposes on other persons rights. And you okay with that?

And by the way Stranger... Obamacare mandates $75M a year to Planned Parenthood. So much for you attempt at discrediting my point.

-9 ( +7 / -16 )

A right to have healthcare imposes on other persons rights. And you okay with that?

1) You don't seem to understand what a 'right' is. It means everyone gets it. 2) Not when it's universal health care.

So much for you attempt at discrediting my point.

What point? You never had one, you simply threw out an extreme as if it somehow countered all of the non-extreme points. As I said, the use of extremes simply highlights the lack of an argument.

5 ( +13 / -8 )

Entirely within the topic Stranger...Obamacare costs!

FYI no one was turned away from hospitals for lack of insurance. So, you say anyone in USA always had that "right". And that includes illegal immigrants too! I am lost now with the lack of logic now.

Nothing is free, when US has bankrupt cities and towns, a crumbling infrastructure, terribly performing inner city schools, a labor participation rate highest in 40-50 years. Now is not the time to tax the working people more as well as the fleeing corporations. It is fiscal suicide!

-8 ( +6 / -14 )

MarkGJul. 24, 2014 - 09:55AM JST A right to have healthcare imposes on other persons rights. And you okay with that?

Social security payments, federal taxation, state taxation, etc. .. these all use the same principle. If you don't agree with Obamacare then you need to scrap all taxation and social security too. Either way, it is a system that has a strong precedent.

And by the way Stranger... Obamacare mandates $75M a year to Planned Parenthood. So much for you attempt at discrediting my point.

Do you even understand what "planned parenthood" means? $75 million for 317 million people means there isn't enough money to even distribute a single $1 condom to each adult. There certainly isn't enough there for free abortions, which was the point you were trying to make... which shows that you're mistaken.

People who have abortions in the U.S. pay for them themselves, most medical insurance doesn't cover them, they cost about $300 to $500 and they're subsidised by private groups of citizens.

11 ( +15 / -4 )

Entirely within the topic Stranger

No, extremes do not make an argument.

...Obamacare costs!

This I agree with. Only because the Republicans forced it to be watered down and pushed away from a single-payer system, which would have been the most economical (read: cheapest) system to have had.

FYI no one was turned away from hospitals for lack of insurance.

Yeah, they were only billed $50 dollars for a bandaid, and $75 for a tylenol.

Now is not the time to tax the working people more as well as the fleeing corporations. It is fiscal suicide!

And once again we have an American that for some reason thinks it's preferable for the insurance companies to become filthy rich on the backs of the people.

11 ( +15 / -4 )

@strangerland

No, it's a right.

Show me where it says, that Health insurance is a right, show me anywhere in the constitution that states that.

150 years ago, you had slavery, and it was considered a right. Are you sure you want to use that time period as a reference for rights?

So now you're comparing the rape, slaughter, murder and the status of servitude and demeaning of an entire race to tax payer subsidized health care? That is NOT my responsibility to babysit every person. Not a good analogy.

How about being able to drive a car, is it a right?

No.

Exactly!

The funny thing about Americans that cracks me up is that you seem to think 'Europe' is a country.

What's even funnier is that, most Europeans think America should be like Europe. Now that's really hilarious.

That's just too ridiculous of a statement to even bother with.

Why is it that you liberals just can't stand hearing the truth?

This I agree with. Only because the Republicans forced it to be watered down and pushed away from a single-payer system, which would have been the most economical (read: cheapest) system to have had.

Regardless, most people DO NOT LIKE Obamacare and many that do have it are constantly complaining about the high premiums and cutbacks on healthcare. It's so unpopular, most Dems that are up for re-election wouldn't think about running on it in the November midterm, that would be suicidal. That has little to do with Republicans, the Dems can't blame the Republicans one bit, because none of them voted for it. Their hands are clean, the Dems have to deal with the outcome and the chickens are flying in way to fast to get on that perch to roost.

And once again we have an American that for some reason thinks it's preferable for the insurance companies to become filthy rich on the backs of the people.

So only Americans are now getting filthy rich? The politicians and insurance companies everywhere are making bucks, not only in the states. Difference is, many Americans have the right to say to the Fed government, stop taking my money, robbing from Paul to give to Peter. We have that choice, but since Obama has been president, this socialist is saying, we HAVE to pay for everyone else.

@frungy

Social security payments, federal taxation, state taxation, etc. .. these all use the same principle. If you don't agree with Obamacare then you need to scrap all taxation and social security too. Either way, it is a system that has a strong precedent.

I'd love for them to do away with the tax system or they should reintroduce a FLAT TAX. As for SS, it won't be long until that gone as well.

-10 ( +3 / -13 )

Bad, bad Obama. What on earth is he thinking about? How dare he help the less fortunate citizens of his country. If people can't afford health care they should do the right thing, find a quite corner and leave this mortal coil with the minimum of fuss. Preferably out of sight of the more fortunate.

7 ( +12 / -5 )

Preferably out of sight of the more fortunate.

But then, whose backs would the rich get more rich off of?!?!

7 ( +9 / -2 )

What is "health care" as a right?

Japan's subsidised "health care" is not good enough by itself so I am in an insurance plan to ensure I have a certain extra package available should I need it.

I wonder if the "health care" that I decide is necessary for myself is actually my right, because I decided that I wanted it?

Fortunately I'm not American and don't need to try to understand the mess I hear has been created there in the land of the free, but as for Japan's system I do believe from experience that it is rorted really. People use the "services" more than they think those services are worth because of the subsidies making them artificially cheap, and people offering the services are also happy to help provide users the opportunity to rort the system as well. This is one area that the Japanese government will probably have to look to reform sooner or later, if it wants to hit it's fiscal consolidation objectives.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Wow Frungy, I had no idea that every man woman and child in US were sexually active and used planned parenthood? Brilliant twist to provide mis-information!

Have any of you seen the latest polls on Obamacare? The majority of US citizens are against it.

Employer mandates yet to be determined.

Medicaid signups went through the roof when the website finally worked. Who pays? Working Americans!

Frungy; Social security payments, federal taxation, state taxation, etc. .. these all use the same principle. If you don't agree with Obamacare then you need to scrap all taxation and social security too. Either way, it is a system that has a strong precedent.

-Believe me, I would scrap a lot of it if I could. But, this is Obamacare we are talking about. Imposed on me last year. SS the monies have been mis-used for decades. Fed Tax, we need some to run the nation, not waste the taxpayers money. State tax, the same. And if ANY of you say these systems are efficient, no point in trying to educate you. But Obamacare in today business/employee climate! Absolutely the wrong time.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

Japan's subsidised "health care" is not good enough by itself so I am in an insurance plan to ensure I have a certain extra package available should I need it.

That's your choice. But the fact of the matter is that every Japanese citizen has the right to health care.

Now you're confusing socialism of its purest form with civilized countries?

Socialism IS civilization. That's why America is not a civilized country.

Just calling you out on your hypocrisy.

So you make up things I said, then call those things I never said hypocrisy. Par for the republican course.

the country is broken since this president has been in power and its gotten worse

You've got your facts right, but your cause and effect wrong. The country is broken no doubt, but the cause is not the current president.

Because, you liberals know you have zero credibility in proving your point.

I'm happy to discuss points that have validity. I'm not willing to give credence to stupidity.

I know how they work, that wasn't the point, the point was that everyone is getting rich, all of them

If you know how they work, then why were you saying that insurance companies get rich with universal health care? That doesn't add up. And who is getting rich off universal health care? It's certainly not the government, and it's certainly not insurance companies. According to you, it's 'everyone' and 'all of them'... whoever these mysterious boogeymen are.

If he did that and helped the people that NEEDED it, I would not have a problem with it

He did do that, and it did help the people who needed it - the uninsured. But now we get the source of your discontent in your next comment:

I was doing fine, I had a great healthcare plan, it didn't have to change.

And this is why America is broken. So many people there are so stuck on 'me me me', that they are blinded to the greater good. It's selfishness that will break America, not selflessness.

7 ( +11 / -4 )

Strangerland,

"the fact of the matter is that every Japanese citizen has the right to health care."

They get what I regard as a deficient one by default, and have to pay for extras. Is that what this right to "health care" is? I'm still confused to be honest.

So many people there are so stuck on 'me me me', that they are blinded to the greater good.

Why do you believe people acting in their own self interest does not work out? You could apply what you have said about health care to other things, and talked about the greater good, but at the end of the day, look what happened to the USSR etc.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

They get what I regard as a deficient one by default, and have to pay for extras. Is that what this right to "health care" is?

It's your claim that it's deficient. But it's one of the top health care systems in the world, with a cap on the amount people have to spend each year, and is provided to all citizens at a low cost. So I don't really put much stock in your claim.

Why do you believe people acting in their own self interest does not work out?

Because we live in societies. None of us can live without the benefit of the rest of us, unless you want to go live in a commune in the hills, and in such a case you'd better be ready to forsake the protection of any police force an army. We are a group species. So people who refuse to place any stock in the group are selfish, and parasites. This isn't to say people shouldn't also think about themselves - there is a happy medium in the middle. But so many Americans want to live with all the benefits of a group, until it comes to paying for the responsibility that comes with it.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

A point thus far ignored is how much money the ACA is saving American society. Already, the rate of medical inflation is slowing, and the cost curve will likely fall further as various efficiencies are introduced. This is quite separate from the cost effectiveness of each dollar spent, which will likely soar as more take advantage of preventive health care rather than relying on emergency room visits after the problem has manifested itself.

America spends more per capita on healthcare than any country in the world, yet their lifespan is roughly equal to the Czech Republic. The ACA is only a first step, but it is a necessary one.

I'd also suggest that it would have been widely popular among Republicans if it had been introduced by McCain or Romney.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

Laguna

Not likely. Because it means 'their tax dollars' going to 'the lazy' Republicans don't mind government largess when it pads their pocket books. But give something the the browns, and their race-traitor allies, and it fascist totalitarianism.

I hate them.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

It's your claim that it's deficient.

It's actually my belief that it's deficient, otherwise I wouldn't be spending extra money to pay for insurance for stuff that it doesn't cover (e.g. because I believe it is deficient).

You might want to look into this yourself if you think all your possible health care requirements are covered by default Japanese health insurance.

Because we live in societies.

Sure, but why wouldn't free people living in a society each acting in their own interests work out to produce the best overall result?

As for the Japanese health system, I tend to think it's a waste of money in some respects, and that's to the detriment of society as a whole.

If individual people only got what they actually wanted it might be a decent improvement.

so many Americans want to live with all the benefits of a group, until it comes to paying for the responsibility that comes with it.

That sounds like anywhere to me, actually, including Japan.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

No Laguna, a struggling economy is not the time to impose higher costs on the American taxpayer. Food stamps at an all time high, realized unemployment at a 40 year high, a defective almost insurmountable in future. Not conducive for another national financial bourdon.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Ah, the US rightwing. Those people who supported the use of nearly a trillion dollars in a disastrous war but don't like the idea of providing healthcare to the less fortunate. If you can find money to kill people, you can find money to help people. I seem to remember a Jewish preacher much admired by many on the US right telling people to give all, yes, all, you have to the poor. A little hard to live by, but certainly a man who believed in wealth redistribution. I also remember his comments about the rich making an ostentatious display of charitable giving.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Time will tell for all those who support this law. It will be a financial debacle just like so many others.

Referred as less fortunate...It depends on the reason and definition.

Lazy! You reap what you sow.

Irresponsible! Your gamble. Maybe you saved insurance dollars maybe you lost your shirt. A choice.

Just a series of misfortune! I'm all in support until back on your feet again. Lifestyles of entitlements weaken a person. We see the result in the inner cities.

If you want a strong nation you need strong people. Entitlements is a character destructin device. A stepping stone, absolutely! Refocus your life, strengthen your position and start again. That's fine with me. Leach off taxpayers, is un patriotic.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Washington Times reports:

"Anyone interested in $2,700 worth of Obamacare subsidies need only tick a few boxes on a government form and tell a few lies to get the discount. That was the finding of Government Accountability Office (GAO) investigators who went undercover to find out what happens when fake applications are submitted to Healthcare.gov, or given to a counselor on the Obamacare telephone hotline.

Fake applications sailed through the system 92 percent of the time. The only time the government blinked was when an application did not show the requested Social Security number. The bureaucrats were fully satisfied as long as the applicant crossed his heart and swore that the information was true. Even noncitizens are eligible for the subsidies they’re not supposed to get. Sham documents sent in to “verify” identities were cheerfully accepted. Officials of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services explained that it tells contractors to make sure the documents are legible, not that they’re authentic.

The GAO is paying real premiums on insurance policies for nonexistent people, demonstrating that the system is flawed to its core. “We are seeing a trend with Obamacare information systems,” says House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, Michigan Republican. “Under every rock, there is incompetence, waste and the potential for fraud.”

0 ( +4 / -4 )

That's your choice. But the fact of the matter is that every Japanese citizen has the right to health care.

The Japanese can do whatever they want, it's their country, I could care less.

Now you're confusing socialism of its purest form with civilized countries?

Socialism IS civilization. That's why America is not a civilized country.

He, we may not be civilized in your eyes, but we still have the freedom to choose and once these two years are behind use, maybe we'll have more unblocked freedom.

So you make up things I said, then call those things I never said hypocrisy. Par for the republican course.

I'm sorry the truth is painful.

You've got your facts right, but your cause and effect wrong. The country is broken no doubt, but the cause is not the current president.

No, really, I don't. The country is in worse shape now than ever in its history and its been because of the last 6 years of radical liberal policies.

I'm happy to discuss points that have validity. I'm not willing to give credence to stupidity.

I'm always happy when Iiberals are honest with themselves after they've taken that look in the mirror.

If you know how they work, then why were you saying that insurance companies get rich with universal health care? That doesn't add up. And who is getting rich off universal health care? It's certainly not the government, and it's certainly not insurance companies. According to you, it's 'everyone' and 'all of them'... whoever these mysterious boogeymen are.

Sorry, I meant the politicians are all getting fat off the tax payer. All of them, libs and Repubs. Of course, the insurance companies are making out like bandits. Come on now....

He did do that, and it did help the people who needed it - the uninsured. But now we get the source of your discontent in your next comment:

Not me, I was fine with my coverage, there was NO NEED to change my good healthcare plan!

And this is why America is broken. So many people there are so stuck on 'me me me', that they are blinded to the greater good. It's selfishness that will break America, not selflessness.

The greater good, spoken like a true socialist. I don't care about others in the sense as a collective. This is why we don't want anything to do with these nanny state countries. If I really want that kind of dependency lifestyle, I'd move to those countries and embrace their entitlement system wholeheartedly, but I don't. I'm not envious and would never want to trade my country for theirs, even it that means, I'm living in an uncivilized society. America is broken because people have gotten lazy and expect the government should provide and take care of its citizens. It used to be that Americans worked hard and most people would never take a dime from no one, but now we have a culture of vegan, PS4, constantly self-absorbed hanging on my smartphone all day, with NO drive, NO motivation, NO skill, lazy to NO end and they want handouts, "do for me, do for me!" That's the America I don't want! Liberals tried so hard to change this country from what it was and what it stood for and no we have built up over the last 6 years a culture that demands the government takes care of them. Deplorable and disgusting. It's the failed policies of the last 6 years of liberals that have ruined this country.

@jim

h, the US rightwing. Those people who supported the use of nearly a trillion dollars in a disastrous war but don't like the idea of providing healthcare to the less fortunate. If you can find money to kill people, you can find money to help people. I seem to remember a Jewish preacher much admired by many on the US right telling people to give all, yes, all, you have to the poor. A little hard to live by, but certainly a man who believed in wealth redistribution. I also remember his comments about the rich making an ostentatious display of charitable giving.

Let's not talk about trillion of $$$$$ wasted, your president did a bang up of a job and spent like a drunken sailor and still does. And giving a handout to a person and taking care of them are two deeply and completely different things. And if you really feel like that then you should be outraged that liberals want to feed and cloth the children from across the border, but ordinary native born Americans have to take a backseat. So what's going on with liberals? Why are you guys NOT consistent? Obamacare is good, but taking care of our veterans, we don't have the money. Feeding illegals, no problem. Why don't you guys ever get your priorities in order?

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

John Gault, you mean it does not run as flawlessly as the IRS! Astounding! I am shocked, utterly shocked to learn their are flaws in the system!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

bass -

I don't care about others

In the proverbial nutshell.

If I really want that kind of dependency lifestyle, I'd move to those countries and embrace their entitlement system wholeheartedly, but I don't.

Didn't you tell us you live in Japan?

but now we have a culture of vegan

If that were true (and in the land of the Big Mac and massive steaks, I very much doubt it), what does it have to do with healthcare and welfare? Is anyone forcing you to forswear meat, omelettes and leather boots?

Jimizo -

I seem to remember a Jewish preacher much admired by many on the US right telling people to give all, yes, all, you have to the poor. A little hard to live by, but certainly a man who believed in wealth redistribution.

lol I see heads exploding....... :-)

5 ( +8 / -3 )

Mark , with all due respect:

No Laguna, a struggling economy is not the time to impose higher costs on the American taxpayer.

You clearly have no idea how the ACA is funded.

Food stamps at an all time high, realized unemployment at a 40 year high,

Precisely why government-subsidized insurance is so crucial.

a defective almost insurmountable in future. Not conducive for another national financial bourdon.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

bass4funk

The Japanese can do whatever they want, it's their country, I could care less.

why do you even comment on this forum then?

6 ( +11 / -5 )

Sorry, Mark - clicked 'submit' too soon.

Not conducive for another national financial bourdon.

For American society as a whole, the ACA will save a huge amount of money. Most every economist and medical expert agrees with that. Now, I know that the ACA and other government programs designed to aid struggling people are opposed by many for ideological reasons, and that is fine, but don't conflate your ideological objections with reality. As has been said, you're entitled to your own opinions but not to your own facts.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

@cleo

In the proverbial nutshell.

Yep, you got that right and proud of it.

Didn't you tell us you live in Japan?

3-4 months out of the year.

If that were true (and in the land of the Big Mac and massive steaks, I very much doubt it), what does it have to do with healthcare and welfare? Is anyone forcing you to forswear meat, omelettes and leather boots?

Yeah, it's true, I'm from California, the vegan darned capital of the world. Eating a steak could get you life in prison or the death penalty. We are the UNITED STATES, we are NOT a collective, our culinary various depending on where you go and California we don't have massive steaks, but Texas does, yum! It was just an example. I was just stating the truth about what is going on in the states.

@Laguna

For American society as a whole, the ACA will save a huge amount of money. Most every economist and medical expert agrees with that.

No, they don't! That is a lie! Why then are so many hospitals and clinics refusing to take Obamacare?

Here are the real facts! Why is it that you liberals still don't get it. Obamacare is a complete disaster at least in its current form, it's too expensive!

http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottgottlieb/2014/03/28/how-much-does-obamacare-rip-off-generation-x-we-ran-the-numbers-here-are-the-results/

Even someone earning $20K a year (the average salary for a full-time cashier) and eligible for Obamacare’s rich “cost sharing subsidies” is still going to find coverage pricey. In Pennsylvania, which was the lowest cost of the four states, the annual premium will run $1,620 for a plan that still leaves them with a $600 deductible. In Illinois, that same plan will cost $2,868 annually with the same $600 deductible. Premiums alone will eat up a whopping 14% of their annual income.

See the accompanying charts for a more detailed breakdown of our data. The numbers show why Obamacare has been such a tough sell among the young. These high prices are a direct consequence of the way the law was designed.

The health plans intentionally keep prices higher for young adults to subsidize older beneficiaries. Now, the White House is wringing its collective hands that the pool of applicants is skewing to older Americans. But this demographic distortion shouldn’t come as a surprise. It begs the question whether anyone in Washington did any market research before they launched this scheme, to see whether Millennials would show up?

http://www.ihatethemedia.com/obama-doctor-obamacare-is-too-damn-expensive

@zichi

why do you even comment on this forum then?

Because I can.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

In the proverbial nutshell.

Yep, you got that right and proud of it.

And are you able to square that with Jimizo's Jewish preacher? How?

Eating a steak could get you life in prison or the death penalty....It was just an example.

An example of what, a great big fat bucket of BS? Give us ONE example of anyone in California (or anywhere else in the US) getting in legal trouble for eating meat.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

All readers back on topic please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

MarkG: But I prefer to be an asset to society. Not a liability.

This is the heart of the issue for Republicans when in reality it has very little to do with the topic at hand. I'm an "asset." Well educated, I make good money. I've always had insurance, never been on welfare. But you know what? It was a bit scary when I was in Japan knowing that if I had ever gotten a serious illness it might have taken away the chance to ever live in the US again. Had I gotten something serious there's no way I could have ever gotten coverage to return back home. It has nothing at all do do with my "asset" status.

My sister is an asset as well. Right after I moved back from Japan she was diagnosed with breast cancer. If you want to have fun, get diagnosed with cancer and then see a letter in the mail from your insurance company. Every time you see it you pray to God that it's not a letter saying they found some way out of covering you due to a technicality. It would be a death sentence. And to think all of those nasty "liabilities" across the US are holding their breath in the same way.

In the Republican mind the issue is 100% about givers and takers. You want Obamacare? Well then you must be a lazy bum who doesn't pay taxes and you just want things for free. End of story. It's insulting to hear seemingly educated people get lead down a path like this and turn into mindless catchphrase machines. And to add insult to injury, they are the ones telling you that they are doing it right because they are so smart and they produce just so much.

Are there takers? Yep. There will be with this law. Same with every single government program on earth. Even the ones you support like the military and border patrol, but I doubt you'd support eliminating those programs. They key is to minimize the waste, not throw out the whole system.

So get off your high horse. There are well-educated people who can disagree with you. And to be honest if this law will destroy America then it's safe to say that the destruction of the entire country hasn't given Republicans the courage to stand up and present an alternative. Seriously. Think about that. It will supposedly bankrupt the country, yet that "fact" hasn't been enough to spur Republicans into putting aside their internal bickering and presenting an alternative. You have had years and years and years and you have produced zero solutions. You should hold your party leaders to higher standards, but then again when "Obama" is the first and last thing you say I suppose your party leaders really don't even exist.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

What I wrote:

FrungyJul. 24, 2014 - 10:16AM JST $75 million for 317 million people means there isn't enough money to even distribute a single $1 condom to each adult.

Adult bolded for emphasis.

What MarkG wrote:

MarkGJul. 24, 2014 - 11:20AM JST Wow Frungy, I had no idea that every man woman and child in US were sexually active and used planned parenthood? Brilliant twist to provide mis-information!

I'm sorry MarkG, I don't engage in intellectual battles with unarmed opponents.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

"Another Greece is not that far off for the Europeans."

European countries with the most generous government healthcare systems, like Scandinavia and Germany, withstood the financial crisis a lot better than countries with smaller systems, and much, much better than the US did.

7 ( +8 / -2 )

MarkG ---what is wrong with taking drugs? Did you not know that most of the drugs are given out by doctors? Oh you mean illegal drugs? Well what is wrong with those? So many delicious drugs out there. Also what is wrong with sleeping until noon? Yes I know it is a lazy attitude but if the person is awake until 4AM then all they slept was 8 hours. Everything is relative including this Obamacare. Send more people to the hospital and create more sick people--hospitals are for those who like being sick. Take some drugs and feel better then there will be no need to go to the hospital.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The biggest problem I'm seeing with Obamacare is that it did nothing to reign in the "for profit" insurance companies and hospitals. Things were a lot better financially when Blue Cross and the hospitals were not-for-profits. Now you've got all these CEOs and their staffs getting paid big money for doing what was done for free. Costs keep going up and up - they are asking for 19% increases for next year. The Japanese system is so much better.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Socialism IS civilization. That's why America is not a civilized country.

I think this says it all from the standpoint of those that view health care as a right. Any other viewpoint for them is illegitimate. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of America that Europeans and others enthralled by Socialism are unable to comprehend.

Since the nations founding, Americans have viewed rights as applying to individuals (at the time for certain individuals that was later expanded to all). Europeans over the last several hundreds years or so have viewed rights as collective (at one time more so for the elites but later expanded to include all). For American's, it has been their traditional view of their worth in relation to government and the desire to preserve it that made America the greatest power in human history. It is likewise the more recent transformation towards collectivism that has lead to it's relative decline and darkened future prospects.

Obamacare does not transform health into a right guaranteed by government. But it does coerce individuals to involuntarily participate in a health care scheme that combined with other social welfare programs is unsustainable without destroying the standard of living that Americans have come to expect.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

I think this says it all from the standpoint of those that view health care as a right.

And how would an intelligent person regard this? We know there's clearly a right to life. What rights might extent from this? For example, if a man is being attacked by another man and his life is in danger, and there's an officer of the law who witnesses it, does the victim have the right to expect that the officer will come to his aid?

Applying it to health care from Angle 1: If a man is being attacked by a medical condition so that his life is in danger, and a medical professional witnesses it, does the victim have a right to expect his life to be saved?

Applying it to health care from Angle 2: Does any group of people have the right to establish a medical practice or a hospital? I would argue there is no right as clear and definite as the right to life. And so, with no such right, the group of people must appeal to the community for permission to open up a practice. In exchange for that permission, the community could well require that the medical professionals agree to obey certain standards -- like when sick people come to you, you treat them. Doctors, like law officers, swear an oath the obligates them to protect human life.

Applying it to health care from Angle 3: A person gets sick in a community to which there is no right to receive health care. Their sickness is a communicable disease which, left untreated, injures and kills dozens in the community. Was this what the founding fathers had in mind when upholding this mythical "individual right?" I don't think so and I don't think most intelligent people would disagree.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

There will be a lot of xpats getting hit with a non-compliance tax.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

It is likewise the more recent transformation towards collectivism that has lead to it's relative decline and darkened future prospects.

On the contrary, it has been America's inability to work together with the people of the world, that has led to its alienation on the world stage, triggering a decline and darkened future prospects. America still hasn't entirely figured out that it can't survive on its own in the world, though it has gotten better at understanding that in recent years.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Does the article say how many of those who "signed up" have actually paid into the scheme? I think the old motto holds: Never trust a statistic that you did not fake yourself...

0 ( +3 / -3 )

I don't live in the United States, but if I did I would be absolutely livid at the general stupidity of everything Obama has ever proposed - and his health care plan in particular.

In the proverbial nutshell.

Why don't you explain to me cleo why we should care about people who so obviously don't care about themselves, and certainly have made no effort to uphold their own social obligations? Shall we subsidize the health care costs of deadbeats, crack moms, welfare scroungers, illegals, and all other manner of social parasites?

And are you able to square that with Jimizo's Jewish preacher? How?

Laughable. Its so pitiful the way liberals turn to Jesus as an authority on those very few occasions when his teachings back up the particular socialist point they are trying to make. All the rest of the time they can't stop mocking anyone who takes the Bible seriously. I think the selective appeal to scripture is way off topic. For every verse you find that makes it look like scrounging is just fine and dandy, I'll find you one that says the opposite. For example, the Bible says "if anyone is unwilling to work, let him not eat". It doesn't say, "let him scrounge off his more well off neighbors". And of course you know as well as I do that there is no way Jesus would be in favor of funding abortions. So how about you debate the issues using 21st century words instead of attempting to appeal to an authority you don't really respect anyway.

Didn't you tell us you live in Japan?

What does that have to do with anything? I may as well ask you, aren't you from the UK? Land of one of the most failed socialist health care policies in the world? I sure don't blame Americans for not wanting to follow down that path.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Is it true Obamacare has increased healthcare costs for employers?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

why we should care about people who so obviously don't care about themselves, and certainly have made no effort to uphold their own social obligations?

You should read more carefully. Bass didn't write that he didn't care about people who so obviously don't care about themselves, and certainly have made no effort to uphold their own social obligations, he wrote all-encompassingly and categorically, I don't care about others.

Its so pitiful the way liberals turn to Jesus as an authority on those very few occasions when his teachings back up the particular socialist point they are trying to make. All the rest of the time they can't stop mocking anyone who takes the Bible seriously.

You do realise the whole point is that these people who claim to take the Bible seriously are the very people who do no such thing?

For every verse you find that makes it look like scrounging is just fine and dandy

No one has produced any verse that makes it look like scrounging is just fine and dandy, so you're off on a straw man argument with that one. The preacher's focus was on giving, not taking.

the Bible says "if anyone is unwilling to work, let him not eat"

That's a quote from Paul in 2 Thessalonians, not from Jesus. Oops. The man himself, in the meantime, was too busy handing round the loaves and fishes to worry about whether any of the 5,000 were scroungers, deadbeats or social parasites. If he were alive today you'd ridicule him.

What does that have to do with anything? I may as well ask you, aren't you from the UK?

It has to do with the fact that bass tells us he refuses to live in a 'nanny state' country (=one with a decent health-care system) and refuses to 'embrace their entitlement system' - yet here he is living in Japan with its excellent public health-care system that he presumably subscribes to. Being from the UK, by the way, makes it extremely difficult for me to understand why Americans are so allergic to having a proper health-care system in place. Far from being a 'failed socialist health care policy', the NHS is something most Brits are understandably proud of. That's not to say it's perfect; there are lots of problems, but it certainly beats not being able to see a doctor until your condition is critical.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

You should read more carefully. Bass didn't write that he didn't care about people who so obviously don't care about themselves, and certainly have made no effort to uphold their own social obligations, he wrote all-encompassingly and categorically, I don't care about others.

Who cares what bass wrote. Why don't you address what I wrote instead of dodging the question. You tell me how Obama's "plan" (and here I use the word in the loosest sense possible) is going to weed out the "people who have made no effort to uphold their own social obligations". I'll help you, its not. His hope is that those citizens who have worked hard and upheld their part of the social contract will just go ahead and pay for the scroungers and the deadbeats - not to mention the thousands of illegals he is encouraging to enter the country on a daily basis.

You do realise the whole point is that these people who claim to take the Bible seriously are the very people who do no such thing?

That's your point. My point is that its no less hypocritical for liberals who spend their lives bashing religion in general, and Christianity in particular, to suddenly seize on the words of Jesus to "back up" their grotesque socialist agenda.

No one has produced any verse that makes it look like scrounging is just fine and dandy, so you're off on a straw man argument with that one.

Yes. Why quote actual verses when its much easier to just make blanket statements like "give all to the poor" or make pointless oblique references to "feeding the 5000".

Oops.

Yeah, thanks for that information that I already knew. That's why I said "Bible" not "Jesus" in reference to my quote.

yet here he is living in Japan with its excellent public health-care system

"Excellent" = cheap. Spoken like a true liberal. If you'd been paying attention, you'd know that the Japanese health care system is broken beyond repair. But hey, we can just bury our heads in the sand and pretend its "excellent" because the premiums aren't breaking your budget.

Far from being a 'failed socialist health care policy', the NHS is something most Brits are understandably proud of.

Lol. Good one cleo. Death pathways, wait times up the wazoo and so-called medical professionals who don't even speak English. A real beacon for the world to follow.

Face it. The only realistic system is one where bleeding heart doctors serve the socially irresponsible and charge them only a pittance, and the rest of us go to hospitals where we pay a fair price for the services rendered. And no, a fair price is probably not cheap.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Who cares what bass wrote.

You were picking me up on my opinion of what bass wrote. if you don't care about it, why bring it up?

Why don't you address what I wrote instead of dodging the question. You tell me how Obama's "plan" (and here I use the word in the loosest sense possible) is going to weed out the "people who have made no effort to uphold their own social obligations".

I have no idea what Obama's plan entails, no real interest in the details since it's never going to affect me personally and it seems even the people who are fighting most fiercely over it aren't all that sure what it entails. But I find it interesting that American society appears to be made up, if posters on JT are to be believed, of fine, upstanding, tax-paying assets to society who create jobs and wealth on the one hand and deadbeats, crack moms, welfare scroungers, illegals, and all other manner of social parasites on the other, with absolutely nothing in between.

its no less hypocritical for liberals who spend their lives bashing religion in general, and Christianity in particular, to suddenly seize on the words of Jesus to "back up" their grotesque socialist agenda.

You misunderstand. I am not 'seizing on the words of Jesus' to 'back up' anything. I'm simply pointing out that the Bible bashers pick and choose only those bits of the Christian doctrine that suit their own selfish, self-centred, self-serving ideas. I've no time for organised religion, but a lot of what Jesus taught regarding morality was good stuff. What's grotesque is that it's the self-professed Christians who call his teachings a 'grotesque socialist agenda'. It's almost as if you think socialist is a dirty word.

the Japanese health care system is broken beyond repair.

No it isn't. I pay in a lot more than I get out, and that's fine; I'm lucky to be so healthy. And I know that if I do come down with some life-threatening illness, the cost of my care isn't going to throw my whole family into debt and bankruptcy. Like the NHS, the Japanese system has problems, it isn't perfect, but it beats the American 'every-man-for-himself-and-if-you-can't-pay-tough' system hands down.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@yabits

We know there's clearly a right to life. And how would an intelligent person regard this? We know there's clearly a right to life. What rights might extent from this?

I agree there is clearly a right to life; though there are some on the Left that think that only a child whose mother chooses to take him or her home from the hospital has that right (but that's a whole other subject). One's right to life means that a person's life and liberty cannot be infringed by another person or group. It explicitly does not mean that one person's rights can be infringed in the service of another. It is moral for a person to choose to help others in need. It is immoral for a person's rights and liberty to be curtailed by government coercion. The only exceptions are to prevent crime and to preserve the continued existence of such benign government.

If a man is being attacked by a medical condition so that his life is in danger, and a medical professional witnesses it, does the victim have a right to expect his life to be saved?

Yes, because the medical professional voluntarily swore an oath to provide immediate life saving care in an emergency. If they refuse they risk losing their livelihood and years of training and expense. They did not swear to provide continuing care from the time of the incident indefinitely.

Doctors, like law officers, swear an oath the obligates them to protect human life.

Yes, doctors and law officers voluntarily choose to swear an oath to provide such services. They are not coerced. Are you starting to catch on now? That is why people in these professions receive public respect because they choose to give up their rights in the service of others.

Their sickness is a communicable disease which, left untreated, injures and kills dozens in the community. Was this what the founding fathers had in mind when upholding this mythical "individual right?"

Actually yes, it is what the Founders had in mind. A person with a communicable disease can have their individual rights restricted because they are a threat to the rights of others. This is actually a really good example to make my point; your rights extend only so far as they do not infringe upon those of another. In this case the disease is not something a person would contract on purpose, but one persons' misfortune should not restrict any other person's freedoms. Therefore, the diseased person is confined and others do not have to stay inside their home in order to preserve their own health.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

bass4funkJul. 24, 2014 - 10:45AM JST

@strangerland

No, it's a right.

Show me where it says, that Health insurance is a right, show me anywhere in the constitution that states that.

In the US Constitution, I do not tell you where it is. Hope you read to find out the hidden gems in it.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

A person with a communicable disease can have their individual rights restricted because they are a threat to the rights of others

That's only if they are diagnosed and treated. If they have no right to treatment at a time when their symptoms might appear trivial, they have a chance of "depriving the lives" of many people -- through no fault of their own.

They did not swear to provide continuing care from the time of the incident indefinitely.

No, but you make it appear that if, a person has money, they can demand to see the doctor whenever they want. If you've got three people with money who are hypochondriacs and one poor person with a potential communicable disease, who should get priority? The timing of the delivery of health care is also critical, and that decision should be left to medical professionals acting upon their ethics, not to the marketplace.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

This debate will need time to show all how costly this will be for the struggling middle class. The bums of society benefit from them. The wealthy in society will not be financially harmed.

Doesn't any Obama supporters get that! Are so incredibly blind?

The US is a very generous society in general. But paying for someones lifestyle for decades or a lifetime is not really helping that person is it? What skills, what pride, what type of character does this person have? "I got over on the system" would be a pride motto. Well, I am the system, my neighbor is the system, my employer is the system. Taxpayers are the system. Not a government money tree!

1 ( +3 / -2 )

@yabits

That's only if they are diagnosed and treated. If they have no right to treatment at a time when their symptoms might appear trivial, they have a chance of "depriving the lives" of many people -- through no fault of their own.

Not true. Hospitals do not refuse to treat a patient - unless of course they are on ObamaCare or some other government sponsored program where they are in a very limited network of doctors. Veterans in America actually do have a "right" to health care yet hundreds (and likely many more) have died waiting for it. I am in favor of giving charity to those who need it. I just do not favor coerced charity into a system that gives false hope and ends up killing people on rationed care and bankrupting the government in the process. If you really cared about those needing health care why don't you create a charity and enlist all those who voted for Obama to contribute 10% of their income to national health care? I suppose you care but you don't care that much do you?

The timing of the delivery of health care is also critical, and that decision should be left to medical professionals acting upon their ethics, not to the marketplace.

You mean the ethics of bureaucrats that ration care and cause veterans to die waiting for their "right" to medical care. Do you mean the embiciles in the British and Canadian medical systems that recycled aborted and miscarried fetuses for heating? How about the ethical Kathleen Sebelius who tried to give a death sentence to a little girl by not allowing a waver for a child needing a lung transplant (her parents sued Sebeilius in court and the child is alive today). Is this the ethical government provided medical care you are talking about? In government health care, doctors don't make all of the decisions for treatment. Many in difficult situations are sentenced to death by a bureaucrat shuffling paper at a desk in Washington DC.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/10717566/Aborted-babies-incinerated-to-heat-UK-hospitals.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2611865/Fetal-tissue-used-power-Oregon-homes.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/kathleen-sebelius-wont-intervene-in-girls-lung-transplant-case/

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The U.S. goverment is struggling with the long term solutions to rising cost of medicare. Obamacare is a redistribution program and penalizes the young, who are generally healthier, by making them pay more for health insurance so that older people pay less. The healthy are sacrificed to the sick, the young to the old, the taxpayer to the subsidy-recipient. Since there are many who cannot afford health insurance, we are told, those who can afford it must help them. Any individual’s interests are to be subordinated to an indefinable “public interest”—which simply means: some people must suffer so that others might benefit.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

As I mentioned in an earlier post, Wealth Redistribution. Not what the middle class needs. Works nicely for the poor. No need to be motivated and improve you life situation. Kind people will care for me.

Obamacare intent and result may not align. Early indicators are they are not inline. Time will tell more accurately.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@sfjp330

Any individual’s interests are to be subordinated to an indefinable “public interest”—which simply means: some people must suffer so that others might benefit.

Another way to be it is like this: "The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few." You just need to hope you are never one of the few. Because if you are - you don't count. That is the essence of Socialism (and ObamaCare).

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@global

In the US Constitution, I do not tell you where it is. Hope you read to find out the hidden gems in it.

Are you joking? There is NO where in the constitution that says, the US government is to provide healthcare. There was NO such thing back then. Our forefathers wanted limited government intrusion. They'd be rolling in their graves if they were alive today and see how the country is turning into a nanny state. Hidden gem. lol

@jeff

European countries with the most generous government healthcare systems, like Scandinavia and Germany, withstood the financial crisis a lot better than countries with smaller systems, and much, much better than the US did.

I grew up half of my life in Germany and went through the socialized healthcare system and for me, I think it wasn't that great, I prefer the American system better, the plan that I had was excellent, I am just going by my experience and what I and my family have been through medically.

@sfjp330

The U.S. goverment is struggling with the long term solutions to rising cost of medicare. Obamacare is a redistribution program and penalizes the young, who are generally healthier, by making them pay more for health insurance so that older people pay less. The healthy are sacrificed to the sick, the young to the old, the taxpayer to the subsidy-recipient. Since there are many who cannot afford health insurance, we are told, those who can afford it must help them. Any individual’s interests are to be subordinated to an indefinable “public interest”—which simply means: some people must suffer so that others might benefit.

That's the key point and you hit the nail on the head. There is NO way the US can sustain this unfordable healthcare at this rate. It was supposed to bring the price of the premiums down and it's doing the exact opposite. The entire income redistribution fiasco isn't working at all because as you said, the young aren't interested in it because the premiums are too high. The White House was anticipating that the young would embrace it and they would be able to reach their quota of 6 million YOUNG subscribers and that hasn't happened and NOW who is getting stuck with the ludicrous high premium costs, the taxpayer. I know 2 people that just pay the fine then go through this medical nightmare.

And to you other liberals, I will agree that the Republicans as of yet, don't have a really good alternative plan, I get it and I think if they want to make inroads, they need to come up with a viable and more affordable option that won't bankrupt the already broken system, It's not that I or most conservatives don't care about people, it's just with everything that is draining the system, there is NO way in its current form can ACA take care of 360 million people in a proper, fair and quality manner, that's my problem and the horror stories that are coming out are over the top mind-blowing. If it's too survive in the long run, there needs to be serious changes made and that means, the Dems will have to sit down with the Republicans to work out, cut and do some major overhauling to make this thing work and NOT put more financial burden on the system and taxpayer.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

bass4funkJul. 25, 2014 - 07:29AM JST

@global

In the US Constitution, I do not tell you where it is. Hope you read to find out the hidden gems in it.

Are you joking? There is NO where in the constitution that says, the US government is to provide healthcare. There was NO such thing back then. Our forefathers wanted limited government intrusion. They'd be rolling in their graves if they were alive today and see how the country is turning into a nanny state. Hidden gem. lol

bass, Please go back and read the US Supreme Court ruling on this issue from the beginning. I do not want to waste my time here. Your ignorance on this issue is beyond me.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Another way to be it is like this: "The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few." You just need to hope you are never one of the few. Because if you are - you don't count. That is the essence of Socialism (and ObamaCare).

No. Communism is the theory that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Socialism is a balance between individual rights, and group responsibility. It allows for the rights of the individual, while also providing for the greater good. It provides a safety net for those in need, and controls against capitalism run amok. Without these controls, you end up with countries like the US and China, where a tiny percentage of the population is extremely wealthy, a small group is middle class, and the majority have almost nothing.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Please go back and read the US Supreme Court ruling on this issue from the beginning. I do not want to waste my time here. Your ignorance on this issue is beyond me.

Sorry, but you quoted the Constitution and there is nothing in the constitution that says that healthcare is an inherent right, which it is not.

You said, "In the US Constitution, I do not tell you where it is."

It has nothing to do with ignorance, Ignorant would be to swallow the tainted Kool aid thinking that Obamacare is THE best thing since apple pie, it has to do with deception and fabrication. Now you also fail to NOTE that the Supreme Court Justices voted 5-4 on the ACA, it wasn't a slam dunk case. The law was supposed to provide low cost healthcare, but it's anything but. Please don't try to think that everyone here is NOT wise when it comes to Obamacare. If it were that great, it wouldn't fall on its own sword, which it is, but you show me 2 examples of people liking it and I will show you 30 where it has been a complete disaster. Come on now....

@stranger

Communism is the theory that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Socialism is a balance between individual rights, and group responsibility. It allows for the rights of the individual, while also providing for the greater good. It provides a safety net for those in need, and controls against capitalism run amok. Without these controls, you end up with countries like the US and China, where a tiny percentage of the population is extremely wealthy, a small group is middle class, and the majority have almost nothing.

Technically, NOT really all that mutually different. Either way, thank God, the US is NOT a communist nation, but we do have a socialist president.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

bass4funkJul. 25, 2014 - 09:25AM JST

the Supreme Court Justices voted 5-4 on the ACA, it wasn't a slam dunk case. The law was supposed to provide low cost healthcare, but it's anything but. Please don't try to think that everyone here is NOT wise when it comes to Obamacare. If it were that great, it wouldn't fall on its own sword, which it is, but you show me 2 examples of people liking it and I will show you 30 where it has been a complete disaster. Come on now....

bass, you are very unreasonable in logic. If you read the US Constitution, there are many hidden gems on this issue and the justices talked about all of them in their decisions. I think I am wasting my time with someone who disrespect the ruling of the highest court of US. People like you do not respect democracy. And again, we need to carry these dead weights on our backs and we need to move forward, bass. American flag wept!!

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Technically, NOT really all that mutually different. Either way, thank God, the US is NOT a communist nation

Neither is China. And 'God' has nothing to do with it, it was the decision of the founding fathers.

but we do have a socialist president.

One of your few saving graces.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

you are very unreasonable in logic. If you read the US Constitution, there are many hidden gems on this issue and the justices talked about all of them in their decisions. I think I am wasting my time with someone who disrespect the ruling of the highest court of US. People like you do not respect democracy. And again, we need to carry these dead weights on our backs and we need to move forward, bass. American flag wept!!

Sorry, Global...but with all due respect that is just a flat out lie. WHERE in the constitution does it say that healthcare is a privilege? Where? Here is some logic, 200 years ago, there was NO such thing, also the Justices cannot force an employer to pay for your healthcare, there are ways to circumvent the system, many are already cutting hours, laying off people and in the worst case scenario, closing shop. As for disrespect, the president should be the first on your priority diss list. Yeah, I respect democracy! I love it! I am just said to NOT see it anymore! The problem is, our democracy has been eroding and has been spat on by this administration time and time again. November is approaching and the Dems are awfully quiet this time around, I wonder why? Could it be the impending reality that losing the Senate is something that Democrats thought would never come to fruition? 2 more years until the madness ends!

@stranger

Neither is China. And 'God' has nothing to do with it, it was the decision of the founding fathers.

It's a FREE and open society? They have FREE elections, people are FREE to live their lives the way they want, however they want? They are FREE to worship as they want? Huh, I was wondering why I couldn't log on to Facebook, Google or search things like Democracy and then finding out a get a blank page. Why are you so adamant when I mentioned the Lords name????

One of your few saving graces.

Hmmm...Thank God, we only have 2 more years to deal within the realm of income redistribution of our socialist anointed leader. This too, shall pass.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

It's a FREE and open society? They have FREE elections, people are FREE to live their lives the way they want, however they want? They are FREE to worship as they want? Huh, I was wondering why I couldn't log on to Facebook, Google or search things like Democracy and then finding out a get a blank page.

What are you referring to? You are replying to my quote, but it has nothing to do with the quote you are replying to.

Why are you so adamant when I mentioned the Lords name????

Because I don't believe in vengeful sky fairies.

Thank God, we only have 2 more years to deal within the realm of income redistribution of our socialist anointed leader. This too, shall pass.

Yeah, I'm really looking forward to the Hillary years myself. Although I'm suspecting that the Republican hatred of a black president will just shift to Republican hatred of a female president.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

bass4funkJul. 25, 2014 - 10:22AM JST

you are very unreasonable in logic. If you read the US Constitution, there are many hidden gems on this issue and the justices talked about all of them in their decisions. I think I am wasting my time with someone who disrespect the ruling of the highest court of US. People like you do not respect democracy. And again, we need to carry these dead weights on our backs and we need to move forward, bass. American flag wept!!

Sorry, Global...but with all due respect that is just a flat out lie. WHERE in the constitution does it say that healthcare is a privilege? Where? Here is some logic, 200 years ago, there was NO such thing, also the Justices cannot force an employer to pay for your healthcare, there are ways to circumvent the system, many are already cutting hours, laying off people and in the worst case scenario, closing shop. As for disrespect, the president should be the first on your priority diss list. Yeah, I respect democracy! I love it! I am just said to NOT see it anymore! The problem is, our democracy has been eroding and has been spat on by this administration time and time again. November is approaching and the Dems are awfully quiet this time around, I wonder why? Could it be the impending reality that losing the Senate is something that Democrats thought would never come to fruition? 2 more years until the madness ends!

bass, I have already told you where to go and find the hidden gems in the Constitution. Your job is to read to comprehend how the justices came to the conclusions. They are all there. You are not a 6 year old child, you can do it..

The Constitution is living. The Bible is living. What you have interpreted about 100 years ago may not be true today. The interpretation needs to adhere to the changes in society.

Actually, US economy is doing okay. You can feel that energy among people. When I am on the Interstates, I see a fewer old broken cars waiting for overhauling and towing. American consumers are buying newer cars, newer appliances, and newer homes. There will be some unemployment changes in labor stats in September though.

Democrats are actually doing a lot better than you think according to the campaign stats. If you call this the madness, too bad, you may have to swallow another 6 more years, bass.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@stranger

What are you referring to? You are replying to my quote, but it has nothing to do with the quote you are replying to.

Sorry and NO it was NOT the decisions of the founding fathers, in that case, the advocated slavery as well, if you really think about it, after all, it is a God given right.

Because I don't believe in vengeful sky fairies.

And you can have that opinion. I don't have a problem with that.

Yeah, I'm really looking forward to the Hillary years myself. Although I'm suspecting that the Republican hatred of a black president will just shift to Republican hatred of a female president.

Hilary's chance of winning the presidency at this point is about as good as the Dems maintaining control of the Senate and picking up seats in the House.

@global

I have already told you where to go and find the hidden gems in the Constitution. Your job is to read to comprehend how the justices came to the conclusions. They are all there. You are not a 6 year old child, you can do it..

Sorry, downloaded it, there is NOTHING there. Maybe, they used some special disappearing ink that only reveals itself when liberals read it. Heck, if I know...

The Constitution is living. The Bible is living. What you have interpreted about 100 years ago may not be true today. The interpretation needs to adhere to the changes in society.

Riiiiiight....

Actually, US economy is doing okay. You can feel that energy among people. When I am on the Interstates, I see a fewer old broken cars waiting for overhauling and towing. American consumers are buying newer cars, newer appliances, and newer homes. There will be some unemployment changes in labor stats in September though.

$17 Trillion in debt, massive spending, massive unemployment in the big cities, overrun with illegals, broken down borders, Blacks and Hispanics are more marginalized and suffering more financially than any other ethnic group, out of control healthcare premiums, the value of the dollar going down, people buying more gold (I did) unemployment benefits are through the roof, the same applies to welfare, that's just a smidgeon of what's happening at home, let's not forget the great job his foreign policy is so embraced by the rest of the world and on and on... But yeah, other than that, people are happy with how the country turned out.

Democrats are actually doing a lot better than you think according to the campaign stats. If you call this the madness, too bad, you may have to swallow another 6 more years, bass.

WT.......wow!

http://www.latestpoliticalpolls.net/2014/02/20/probability-democrats-will-lose-the-senate-in-2014/

This is a grim picture for Senate Democrats, suggesting that the president would have to get his approval above 50 percent by Election Day before they would be favored to hold the chamber. This is also consistent with what we’ve seen in polling, which shows the seven “red state” Democrats in truly severe states of distress, while Democrats in Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire and Colorado are exhibiting surprising weakness. If these 11 seats are showing similar signs of weakness in November, Democrats will have an extremely difficult time holding the chamber. At Obama’s current 44 percent approval rating, we’d expect Democrats to lose somewhere between nine and 13 seats.

Ouch!

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Either way, thank God, the US is NOT a communist nation

'God' has nothing to do with it, it was the decision of the founding fathers.

Sorry and NO it was NOT the decisions of the founding fathers, in that case, the advocated slavery as well, if you really think about it, after all, it is a God given right.

You mean the founding fathers weren't the ones who chose democracy for the US?

Hilary's chance of winning the presidency at this point is about as good as the Dems maintaining control of the Senate and picking up seats in the House.

I can't speak as to how the 2014 elections will go, but the same thing will happen in 2016 as happened in 2012 - the Republicans will try so hard to out-vitriol each other in the primaries, that whoever wins will have already killed their chances of winning the presidency. That leaves Hillary by default, unless someone else manages to take the democratic primaries.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@global

LOL, bass you DID NOT read it.

Oh, Yeah, I did.

The whole readings take about a whole week for legal professions to really comprehend as there are too many details. You just lost your credibility in your post.

There is NO legal lawyer in their right mind that would dare to interpret that the founding fathers had Obamacare in mind when they drafted up the constitution. Seriously, why do liberals like to spin things so much out of the stratosphere. You think they sailed to America have more government intrusion? Seriously!

@stranger

You mean the founding fathers weren't the ones who chose democracy for the US?

Having democracy and advocating a big government apparatus of a Nanny state is NOT what they envisioned.

I can't speak as to how the 2014 elections will go, but the same thing will happen in 2016 as happened in 2012 - the Republicans will try so hard to out-vitriol each other in the primaries, that whoever wins will have already killed their chances of winning the presidency. That leaves Hillary by default, unless someone else manages to take the democratic primaries.

Could be, anything is possible, but after the shock and awe and ultimately failure of the Obama presidency, I think the Republicans are going to tread more lightly this time around. No One wants this kind of nightmare again, NO ONE! As for Hilary, I highly doubt it, she's already stepping on too many land mines and she still has a lot of unanswered questions, especially about Benghazi and other off the wall statements, NOT to mention her age. Hey, if you guys thought McCain was too old (and he's still alive by the way) Hilary, ain't NO spring chicken!

You mean the guy who invaded a country for no good reason, put two wars on the company credit card, and tanked the economy?

Don't forget, Obama tripled that. $17 Trillion and counting. Keep it real now and Afghanistan was his war, he said that, so many times, oh, because it went south, he wants to throw it back and NOT take credit? But he will if it were going HIS way. Lol

If you think criticism of Bush had anything to do with his race, you really are living deep in the bubble.

No, I am just calling it for the hypocrisy that it is, when Blacks, Hispanics and other Non-Whites would say things racially about Bush, no one said a thing, it's acceptable, but if you ONLY criticize Obama about his policies, you are a racist, don't follow him, you are a racist, think he's wrong, you are a racist, if you are Black and you disagree with him, you are a sellout or an Oreo. No, Im not living in a bubble, but libs love nothing more to use the race card, because that's the only thing they have. They can't run on their record, note this president.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

bass4funkJul. 25, 2014 - 12:29PM JST

@global

LOL, bass you DID NOT read it.

Oh, Yeah, I did.

You did not. You can get it from the Library of Congress. Good luck.

The whole readings take about a whole week for legal professions to really comprehend as there are too many details. You just lost your credibility in your post.

There is NO legal lawyer in their right mind that would dare to interpret that the founding fathers had Obamacare in mind when they drafted up the constitution. Seriously, why do liberals like to spin things so much out of the stratosphere. You think they sailed to America have more government intrusion? Seriously!

You have just insulted all legal professionals. Hope you realize that. The law is very complex. That's why we have lawyers. We do not need a car salesman.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

There is NO legal lawyer in their right mind that would dare to interpret that the founding fathers had Obamacare in mind when they drafted up the constitution

And yet, some ancient talk speaking of a militia is somehow used to mean that people should have the right to keep military grade firearms.

Having democracy and advocating a big government apparatus of a Nanny state is NOT what they envisioned.

Whether it is or not is irrelevant, seeing as the claim I was making that you were refuting was that the founding fathers were responsible for America not being a communist state. So I'm not sure why you are bringing up this irrelevant information in rebuttal.

Don't forget, Obama tripled that. $17 Trillion and counting.

No no no no. Obama received the bill for two wars and a collapsed economy. You cannot blame the tripling of the debt entirely on him. In all honesty, I personally don't think you can blame much of any of it on him, but I know that I am biased on the matter, so for the sake of argument, I'm willing to accept that he has some responsibility for it. But you are trying to pin Bush's spending, and the results of Bush's failed presidency (aka the collapsed economy) on Obama. So if Obama were suddenly spend another $17 trillion on credit between now and the end of his presidency, and a republican became president in 2016, after which the new $17 trillion came due, would you blame that $17 on the new president, or on Obama? We both know the answer to that one.

No, Im not living in a bubble, but libs love nothing more to use the race card, because that's the only thing they have.

If they had valid criticisms of his presidency, that hadn't started literally on day one, then I'd be inclined to agree that it's not racist. But when people were showing up to town meetings with guns, when Republican politicians show open disrespect to the acting president, something that was never done before, then I call it for what it is - hatred of a black president.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

globalwatcher and bass4funk, please stop bickering

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"You know, the discussions about Obamacare and what the replacement bill would look like continue," House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) told reporters on Thursday. "We're trying to build consensus around one plan. Not there yet."

It's only been years.

This is part of the larger problem with Republicans. I'm sure Republican supporters will give John a wink and a nod and tell him that he's probably doing a bang-up job working on that plan of his, but at the end of the day they expect nothing from him other than catchphrases to attack Obama. The GOP leaders have successfully trained their followers to look to them for no ideas at all. Just look at the comments here. Thousands of words talking about how Obamacare will destroy the country, yet not a single Republican here writes a single word asking where Boehner's plan is. I guess we'll get to that later.

The fact is that Republicans cannot present a plan. They are too fractured to agree on anything that could come up for a vote. And we know people like Cruz will be waiting in the shadows to put that knife into the back of his Republican colleagues if they go out on a limb and propose one. If anyone can come up with a way for Republicans to even present a plan, I'd like to hear it. But Lord knows it won't come from Republicans. Just asking them for a plan doesn't compute since they can't start the sentence with "Obama." They will just stare at you and blink with their mouths open.

In the meantime we'll just keep waiting, I suppose. Republicans have all the answers but none of the solutions.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

And yet, some ancient talk speaking of a militia is somehow used to mean that people should have the right to keep military grade firearms.

How does the militia have anything to do with the president being so God awful, not to mention making very bad decisions and deceiving the public.

Whether it is or not is irrelevant, seeing as the claim I was making that you were refuting was that the founding fathers were responsible for America not being a communist state. So I'm not sure why you are bringing up this irrelevant information in rebuttal.

Didn't you bring up the militia just a few minutes ago? It seems like you and Global want to insist that healthcare is fudemental right and in the constitution which it is NOT no matter how liberals try to spin the written document and you seem like you are praising at least in some small part socialism, is it not true?

No no no no. Obama received the bill for two wars and a collapsed economy. You cannot blame the tripling of the debt entirely on him.

For the last 6 years, it seems nothing is Obama's fault, becuase as the Sainted anointed one, he is not only perfect, he is impervious from making ANY mistakes. So the record spending these last 6 years as president doesn't make him liable for any scrutiny whatsoever, silly me.

In all honesty, I personally don't think you can blame much of any of it on him, but I know that I am biased on the matter, so for the sake of argument, I'm willing to accept that he has some responsibility for it.

For example?

But you are trying to pin Bush's spending, and the results of Bush's failed presidency (aka the collapsed economy) on Obama. So if Obama were suddenly spend another $17 trillion on credit between now and the end of his presidency, and a republican became president in 2016, after which the new $17 trillion came due, would you blame that $17 on the new president, or on Obama? We both know the answer to that one.

Of course, I would blame Obama and the future president that would go buck crazy with the funds, but alas, it might have to take spending a lot of money to reset things and to get the country back on trackUnlike most of the liberals on JT that have a very partisan skewed viewpoint on anything political, I will say this, I have never gave Bush a pass on anything and I was very critical of him as I think most of the other conservatives on JT, I fault Bush for many things, however, you cannot dismiss that Obama has been a terrible president, it's true. Yet, you guys try to defend his failed policies. If Obama were doing that great, Dems across the country could campaign on Obamacare as a proud achievement of their endeavors working with this president, but they can't and they won't! Why? Because it would be political suicide for them and they know it. The people are tired being lied to by the politicians both parties, but Obama is a spending machine on steroids and the people want it to stop, that's why the Republicans are winning these elections, it's the PEOPLE sending Washington, the president and Reid a notice, the clock is ticking. Obamacare is a huge and the biggest problem for Americans, add to that the private job sector and that the job market has created more part-time jobs than FULL-time is crippling the country. We are spending more than we are taking in. I don't dislike liberals because they are liberals, I dislike them because they are pushy, egotistical, over confident and think that they are incapable of making ANY mistakes and think that their ideology has to be accepted NO matter what, there is NO middle, it's our way or No way. The cockiness of liberals is their downfall. Both parties can get drunk on power, but the Democrats for some reason never want to admit their shortcomings. Hopefully, after November the Dems will reflect as the Republicans had to do in 2008 and try a different approach instead of an aggressive, progressive agenda which for America didn't work and put the country in a downward spiral, failed policies at its worst.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Didn't you bring up the militia just a few minutes ago? It seems like you and Global want to insist that healthcare is fudemental right and in the constitution which it is NOT no matter how liberals try to spin the written document and you seem like you are praising at least in some small part socialism, is it not true?

I get this into your head until you get it. The healthcare is fundamental right guaranteed in the US Constitution. I do not think you have never read it. Or you cannot interpret the implying content.

Of course, I would blame Obama and the future president that would go buck crazy with the funds, but alas, it might have to take spending a lot of money to reset things and to get the country back on trackUnlike most of the liberals on JT that have a very partisan skewed viewpoint on anything political

I recommend a great book "Stress Test" written by Timothy Geithner. The book will show you how US was ready to go off the cliff when Obama first took the oval office. This book was highly recommended by Bill Gates. Hope you read it and understand how Obama saved the country from going under.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I did, but you're wrong.

Nancy Pelosi was recently asked by a reporter, ""Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?"

She replied, "Are you serious? Are you serious?"

Yes Madam Speaker, we are serious. At least, I am. In my opinion, our Constitution is the most profound political document ever written. Many Americans besides me would really like a "serious" answer to that reporter's question.

Democrat House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer at least made an attempt at an answer. He was also asked where in the Constitution was Congress granted the power to mandate that a person must buy a health insurance policy.

Hoyer's answer:

Well, in promoting the general welfare the Constitution obviously gives broad authority to Congress to effect that end. The end that we're trying to effect is to make health care affordable, so I think clearly this is within our constitutional responsibility. News flash for Congressman Hoyer: "general welfare" is mentioned only twice in the Constitution. The phrase appears once in the Preamble, but the Preamble gives the legislative branch no authority whatsoever.

"General welfare" is also mentioned once in Article I, Section 8. Here is what it actually means in that section.

The powers of the legislative branch are stated in the Constitution. The powers specifically granted to the Congress are spelled out in Article I, Section 8. Since it isn't that long of a section -- and there aren't that many powers -- I will reproduce the entire enumerated powers of the Congress in the first endnote below[i]. The words "general Welfare" show up in the first line of Article I, Section 8: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States ... Notice that the Constitution doesn't say the "general welfare of the citizens of the United States." It says "general Welfare of the United States." This clause only gives the Congress the power to raise money to defend the country and pay for the day-to-day operations of the government. It says nothing at all about building bridges to nowhere, or paving bike paths, or spending money on any other kind of pork barrel project -- including health care. Read the rest of Article I, Section 8 below. The exact powers of the Congress are listed there. That's it. That is all the constitutional power that Nancy and Steny have. I know this because the people who wrote the Constitution stuck on two pesky amendments. I like to call them the "And we really mean it!" amendments. Here they are: Amendment 9 The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment 10 The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. The exact wording of the 10th Amendment is important. Here, the "United States" clearly means the federal government. The powers of the United States (according to the Constitution) are not the same as the powers of its citizens ("the people"), nor are they the same as the powers of the individual states.

So the phrase, in Article I, Section 8, "general Welfare of the United States" only applies to the inner workings of the federal government. The Framers could not have made the point any clearer. Pelosi and Hoyer have no power over the citizens' health care because they are given that power nowhere in the Constitution.

**The words "health" or "health care" appear nowhere in the Constitution[ii].++

So according to the 9th and 10th Amendments, the "right" of health care must be guaranteed and paid for by each individual state. For example, Massachusetts has made access to health care a "right." According to the Constitution, the citizens of a particular state can do that. Massachusetts can make government-mandated health care a "right." Whether or not the citizens of Massachusetts can afford to pay for that "right" is turning out to be quite a problem. But that is a dilemma for the people of the state of Massachusetts to work out. If the folks in Massachusetts don't want to pay for the "right" to government-mandated health care, then they can elect some different politicians and repeal the law -- or they can move to a state the does not guarantee a "right" to government-mandated health care. If a particular state does not provide a government-mandated "right" to health care, the choice to provide (or not to provide) for our own health care is up to each of us. Health care is our choice, but it is not a "right" if it has not been made a right by an individual state.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Don't forget ObamaCare was a Republican idea

0 ( +3 / -3 )

bass, why are you still stuck there? LOL

What did the US Supreme Court decide and what does the article 14th say? LOL

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@Wolfpack food and healthcare should be affordable for all. not just the rich. and to countries like India that reverse engineer generic drugs for there people. if the foreign drug companies wont make medicines affordable for the poorest people in this world I say screw them.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I AM not stuck on anything,

Notice that the Constitution doesn't say the "general welfare of the citizens of the United States." It says "general Welfare of the United States." This clause only gives the Congress the power to raise money to defend the country and pay for the day-to-day operations of the government. It says nothing at all about building bridges to nowhere, or paving bike paths, or spending money on any other kind of pork barrel project -- including health care. Read the rest of Article I, Section 8 below. The exact powers of the Congress are listed there.**

That is all the constitutional power that Nancy and Steny have. I know this because the people who wrote the Constitution stuck on two pesky amendments. I like to call them the "And we really mean it!" amendments. Here they are: Amendment 9 The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment 10 The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. The exact wording of the 10th Amendment is important. Here, the "United States" clearly means the federal government. The powers of the United States (according to the Constitution) are not the same as the powers of its citizens ("the people"), nor are they the same as the powers of the individual states.

So the phrase, in Article I, Section 8, "general Welfare of the United States" only applies to the inner workings of the federal government. The Framers could not have made the point any clearer. Pelosi and Hoyer have no power over the citizens' health care because they are given that power nowhere in the Constitution.

The words "health" or "health care" appear nowhere in the Constitution

It is a privilege, NOT a fundamental right.

I am just saying that what the Dems and Obama are doing or rather did was ram a health legislation through without the support of any Republicans and now that this healthcare system is blowing up in their faces and the people are pissed off because they were promised the kitchen sink and all they got were high premium rates, the ACA is NOT affordable at all for thousands of Americans. Seriously, name ONE Democrat that will run on Obamacare this fall, I guarantee you, NONE of them will, not even Hilary if she runs, she'd better think of a way to distance herself from Obamacare if she even hopes to make it out of the starting gate.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

The words "health" or "health care" appear nowhere in the Constitution

bass, you need to understand what I have just said. The Constitution is living. The Bible is living. You need to go and see what the US justices had to say on that. You said you have read it, but I doubt it very seriously.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

RE: 'right' to healthcare.

Right. Popular conception of a "right" is not the same as the legal understanding.

Sloganeering aside, The ACA a law, passed under the Tax and Spending Power of Congress. Congress has broad power to tax, and to expend revenues within its discretion. In fact, the Tax and Spending power of Congress is the most explicit and strongest Constitutional backed power Congress has, along with the power to declare war.

The Tax and Spending power may be limited when it conflicts with other equally explicit Constitutional provisions, Such as an independant judiciary, the CIC power of the President, and the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, or the 10th Amendment.

Let me be clear: SCOTUS ruled the ACA constitutional under the Tax and Spending Clause. It was never an issue, legally, if people have a constituional right to health care. The ONLY issue was wether the law passed by Congress was constitutional. SCOTUS says it was. While you disagree, that is not the point. THe point is whether Congress has the power to pass such a law, not the substance of the law itself.

So, enough, please of the argument that health care is a 'right.' In America, it is not, legally speaking, a right.

BECAUSE THE CONSTITUTION IS SILENT on the issue. NOTHING BUT CRICKETS.

If you want to make it a 'right' you need to Amend the Constitution.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@JTDan

Yes, I agree with that. My argument was the actual "Substance" of the law when when the constitution was actually drafted.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Founding fathers (Some who owned slaves) are dead. Also, slavery used to be in the constitution so this piece of paper is meant to be changed. This mandate that the Republicans created would not be the first health mandate. But when it comes to true conservatism a single payer solution is more aligned with being conservative than ObamaCare anyway.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

@JTDanMan

Right. Popular conception of a "right" is not the same as the legal understanding.

Nicely done explanation.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@wolfpack

This is where I think many liberals get in the weeds as to being confused (or denial) of the actual legal terminology. @JT Yes, thanks for putting it in the micro context, appreciate it.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

The constitution must have stated Medicare is a right

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Entitlement spending now makes up the bulk of government expenditures, and this spending now exceeds revenue collected to pay for it, hence heavy national debts among developed countries which are all nearing or surpassing GDP, or in Japan's case, are two-and-a-half times GDP. Entitlement spending continues to increase dramatically, and government spending in developed countries is slowly nearing the point where it will surpass private sector spending. This amount of government spending is already beyond the means available to repay it.

Economic growth among developed countries is stagnant. People are seeing their pay not increasing, or in some cases decreasing. Meaningful work is hard to find, many companies have outsourced jobs to other countries as the cost of doing business domestically has become too high. Companies are not moving because labor costs are too high, they are moving because taxes are too high. Most companies spend more on tax than they do on payroll. The more tax they pay, the less pay they can offer.

With the governments taking and spending so much of our money, we have less of it ourselves to invest with. Unlike governmnt spending, private-sector spending usually generates a return. Government programs spend more on administration and overhead than they do on actual benefits or projects, and generally provide a negative return on investment. You, I, and the companies we work for must by law live within our means. We cannot borrow without limit or end, we must be financially responsible. But our governments at all levels do not apply the same standards to themselves. The government itself is the deadweight that is holding back growth. While doing everything in it's power to provide for it's own growth, it is taking away from the private sector's ability to do the same.

Obamacare, medicare, and other subsidies do not and will not make healthcare more easily affordable or available. It is past government subsidizing of health care which have driven prices so high, and more subsidies will only do the same. Already the costs of the "affordable health care" act have greatly exceeded estimates, and the act has not yet been fully implemented.

I would love to see the mathematical formula used for determining the decrease in the number of uninsured, if it is anything like the formulas used to determine unemployment, or economic growth figures....

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Entitlement spending now makes up the bulk of government expenditures

Really? Because I'd bet a dollar to a donut that military spending takes up a larger portion than 'entitlement' spending. Unless you are including military spending in that comment, since it entitles the military industrial complex to get richer and richer.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

"The government itself is the deadweight that is holding back growth." Eliminate Medicare?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Really? Because I'd bet a dollar to a donut that military spending takes up a larger portion than 'entitlement' spending. Unless you are including military spending in that comment, since it entitles the military industrial complex to get richer and richer.

Oh, please, Obamacare is sucking the economy dry and is on its way to bankrupting the nation and putting in a depression because libs don't want to cut ANY entitlements on anything, female contraceptives, seriously? I don't want to pay for that, I have no need for it. If any woman wants it, they should pay for it, NOT me. Also, as in typical liberal fashion, we are becoming the pussy society of this planet, while China and Russia are building and advancing their military and embarrassing enough we have to pay the Russians millions of $$ to hitch a ride on the space station, rip off? Naw! Thanks to this president for killing off NASA, but the economy sucks, we are spending more than we are taking in, we can't afford these massive entitlements, Obama doesn't want to sit with the Republicans to come to a middle ground, this is the laziest backward president I have ever seen. These entitlements are NOT a privilege!

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

"Obamacare is sucking the economy dry" Then why did the Republicans want it in the first place?

Free contraception has been going on for decades. This includes at the local health departments (it's cheaper than paying for illegitimate babies so it's an economic decision)

"we can't afford these massive entitlements" OK, fine, eliminate Medicare, then.

"laziest backward president I have ever seen" Obama vs. Bush jr? Obama worked his way out of food stamps. If he weren't president he would be working as a highly paid lawyer.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

bass: Obamacare is sucking the economy dry and is on its way to bankrupting the nation and putting in a depression

Then you must be eagerly awaiting the Republican alternative, which should be out in, I dunno, a few more years?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

By the way, when it comes to "free" contraceptives you can get free condoms too.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The Republicans complain about ObamaCare even though they are the ones who invented it.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

"Funny thing is, I have never met a liberal that did NOT like ANY kind of taxes.

"Read my lips!!!!!!

Reagan

Clinton lowered capital gains tax.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I'll never support huge government supported healthcare system.

Ridiculous. No one likes taxes. But some people accept that they have to exist. Without them you wouldn't be able to have the massive military you so want. Without them you wouldn't have roads to drive on. Without them you wouldn't have police to protect you.

I don't mind paying taxes, but under this president we're paying way, way, way too much, because of that high opposition to the increasing tax spending, the Tea Party was born ( something good did come out of it )

Thanks - your comment illustrated the point I was making so well, that if I didn't know better, I would almost think you were a liberal pretending to be a republican just to make that point!

Actually, I'm blaming congress which comprises of both parties, last I checked and I blame this joker for not trying to work with congress. Again, 2 more years until the madness ends. By the way, I'm not a Republican and definitely NOT a liberal.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

"but under this president we're paying way, way, way too much" How much percentage-wise did they go up since Bush? And where did taxes go up? For example, tobacco?

How can we both reduce the debt AND keep taxes low as the T-partiers want? May I have a specific answer? I have a couple of ideas: Get out of the prison economy (finish the war on drugs). Gradually raise pension requirements for number of years needed to work and they need to increase their contributions.

How can we rebuild America's highway infrastructure without raising gas tax? People are driving more gas efficient cars (or not driving at all) which is killing the highway trust fund. Less gas sales = less gas tax collected. Highway repair does not grow on trees. More tolls? Open more turnpikes and close the freeways? Any ideas without blaming Obama (again)?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

How can we both reduce the debt AND keep taxes low as the T-partiers want? May I have a specific answer?

Reduce the military.

I like your ideas as well though.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

How can we both reduce the debt AND keep taxes low as the T-partiers want? May I have a specific answer? I have a couple of ideas: Get out of the prison economy (finish the war on drugs). Gradually raise pension requirements for number of years needed to work and they need to increase their contributions.

Repealing or restructuring Obamacare would be a start and cut massive entitlement spending.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

"Repealing or restructuring Obamacare" Which is it?

"Repealing" But both parties want Obamacare. it's impossible. But how can you say that and at the same time accept Medicare? And which part of ObamaCare? Just ObamaCare? Medicaid is part of it. We should have Medicaid (which has been growing for decades) but no ObamaCare? Please clarify.

"restructuring Obamacare" Please be specific.

"cut massive entitlement spending" Medicare and Social Security?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

bass4funkJul. 27, 2014 - 02:45AM JST

How can we both reduce the debt AND keep taxes low as the T-partiers want? May I have a specific answer? I have a couple of ideas: Get out of the prison economy (finish the war on drugs). Gradually raise pension requirements for number of years needed to work and they need to increase their contributions.

Repealing or restructuring Obamacare would be a start and cut massive entitlement spending.

No, bass you are too far off. to see the reality of medical care industry.. Obamacare is actually saving us.

All uninsured who received medical care from our city hospital tanked the system. It was sucking too much tax money from the city annual budget since 20 years ago. It had a liability of $375,000/day 365 days and ten years.. . Nobody wanted to invest for this city hospital even though it was rated one of the best among best US 500 hospital.

Thanks to Obama care, the State of Colorado bought it and changed it the University of Colorado Medical Center. Now it has been doing great.

Also, I would like to add you need to read the US Supreme Court decision how the justices interpreted the law. It is a right.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Obama deserves more listening to.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Really? Because I'd bet a dollar to a donut that military spending takes up a larger portion than 'entitlement' spending. Unless you are including military spending in that comment, since it entitles the military industrial complex to get richer and richer.

It does not, and has not. HHS (health and social services) spending in America has exceeded defense spending since the early 70's. This year HHS spending will be about four times defense spending costs. Defense spending this year will be only 13% of the annual budget.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

It does not, and has not. HHS (health and social services) spending in America has exceeded defense spending since the early 70's. This year HHS spending will be about four times defense spending costs. Defense spending this year will be only 13% of the annual budget.

All words. Let's see you back that up with evidence.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

In Italy we have free health care. Despite all my country's faults, I think this is really a good thing. Also an illegal immigrant has the right to free health care. I'm surprised how in 2014 the US and other developed countries don't have this kind of service yet.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

It does not, and has not. HHS (health and social services) spending in America has exceeded defense spending since the early 70's. This year HHS spending will be about four times defense spending costs. Defense spending this year will be only 13% of the annual budget.

Exactly! Not only that, the premiums are for some 20 to 200% higher now then they thought and many people can't pay or are just opting out and would rather pay the fine. This thing is a complete disaster and all the more reason many Dems that are up for reelection are not going to run or really mention Obamacare, not unless they want to lose their seat. But as some Dems keep trying to push this monstrosity, it just makes the Dems look like idiots, not t mention, people are tired of Reid blocking EVERY legislation brought on by the House, sure Boehner isn't THE most charismatic guy, but at least he trying to work with this joker. It's insane. In California if I were to buy this crap, I would see an increase of 33% (I'm in my 40s) and if you are around 27 years of age, you'll see a 44% increase. This is just madness. But again, I'm not surprised, libs are bad at math for one and the other, libs don't care, because it's NOT THEIR MONEY! I personally, would never buy this crap. I just pay the penalty and pay as I go. But for people that aren't as fortunate as I am and have to struggle to pay these over priced premiums, my heart goes out to them.

High among the list of Obamacare’s most embarrassing failures is the fact that it will not meet its stated purpose of reducing to a low level the number of Americans who lack health insurance. This goal was the justification for the massive disruption of the health care system that Obamacare has imposed. The millions and millions of Americans who will lose their health insurance plan and/or their doctors, and/or will see their premiums sky-rocket suffer these consequences in the name of making sure that few Americans lack coverage.

But Obamacare will not deliver on this promise. Accordingly, as The New York Times informs us, the Census Bureau, the authoritative source of health insurance data for more than three decades, is changing its annual survey so thoroughly that it will be difficult to measure the impact of Obamacare on the number of uninsured.

The Census Bureau describes the changes to its survey as a “total revision to health insurance questions.” And it concedes that, given the revision, it will be difficult to say how much of any change in the number of uninsured is attributable to Obamacare and how much to the use of a new survey instrument.

In short, unable to deliver on its central Obamacare promise, the administration now tries to muddy the waters so its critics can’t quantify the underperformance.

Now for the big question: Will the “new survey instrument” cause the number of uninsured to be reported as higher or lower than it would have been reported under the old method? If you said the new instrument will cause the Census Bureau to find a lower number of uninsured than would have been found under the old metric, you win (but you still may be unable to keep your insurance plan). “We are expecting much lower numbers just because of the questions and how they are asked,” said Brett J. O’Hara, chief of the health statistics branch at the Census Bureau.

Naturally, the Census Bureau claims that the changes in the survey are intended to improve its accuracy. But the Obama administration never questioned the accuracy of the survey when it used Census Bureau numbers to make the case that America desperately needed Obamacare.

Obamacare, then, appears to be based on false claims about the number of uninsured in America. If not, then it will be defended in the future based on false claims about the same issue.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

That was a big long post from the bubble. Unfortunately without any basis in reality, as evidenced by the lack of anything to actually back it up.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

All words. Let's see you back that up with evidence.

Table 2.02: Total Spending Breakdown FY 2014

Pensions. $1.2 trillion Healthcare $1.3 trillion Education $1 trillion Defence $.8 trillion Welfare $.5 trillion Other spending $1.5 trillion

Total: $6.3 trillion

Deficit $.6 trillion

This is public information, google it yourself if you don't believe me

0 ( +3 / -3 )

@stranger

Or in other words, I really don't care about the truth, it means nothing to me. Surprised? Not a bit. Liberals are never pragmatic and just see the worldview from a skewed octagon myoptic view.

@alex

Italy doesn't have a population of over 360 million plus people, add to that a couple of a million illegal aliens, there's not way financially we can afford to give and offer FREE....first off, it's not free, for the people that can't afford it, it's free, but not for the top 1% and the middleclass. The difference is, people like me will just either pay the fine or just leave, we don't have to deal with this crap, but the people that can't leave they have to suffer the burden of paying these outrageous high premiums not only for themselves, but for other people as well.

@Global

You trying that spin again? Really?

The state of Colorado has doubled its expectations for the number of people who will drop or quit paying for their exchange-based health coverage next fiscal year, according to The Denver Post. At the close of Obamacare's first enrollment period in April, the state had projected a 13 percent drop rate, but that's been revised to 24 percent. Basically, a quarter of the people who get coverage through the exchange won't stick with it.

There are two big implications for this revision. The first, which the article highlights, is that the state will generate $1 million less revenue than expected to help pay for continued operation of its exchange. The state charges a fee for each policy; more dropped policies means less money coming in to fund exchange operations. Current projections suggest that Colorado will still bring in enough revenue to pay its expenses next year, but a revision of this size suggests that other states which are less certain about how they'll pay for their exchanges now that federal grant money is running out may have trouble as well. As Vox's Sarah Kliff noted recently, Obamacare requires state-run exchanges to be self sustaining starting next year, but not all of them have clear funding strategies in place.

The second implication here is that coverage through Obamacare may be more volatile than expected. Colorado is just one state, but what if this is the broader trend? There's some suggestion that this could be the case. One of the state's exchange finance committee members told the Post that the dropped-policy projection was revised "based on feedback we're getting from other states."

If one in four people getting insurance through the exchanges each year stop paying or drop out for some other reason, then exchange-based coverage could turn out to be fairly unstable, and would probably end up being reshaped somewhat to serve the non-trivial segment of the exchange population that hops on each year only to quit the policy a few months down the road.

DENVER — Obamacare’s popularity continues to dive among Colorado voters, with more than half of those surveyed saying they disapprove of the federal health-care law.

A Rasmussen Reports survey released Tuesday found only 39 percent of Colorado voters polled approve of the Affordable Care Act, while a whopping 58 percent disapprove.

That’s a drop from March 11, the date of the previous Rasmussen poll on the issue, which found 42 percent of Coloradans approved and 54 percent disapproved of Obamacare.

“This includes 16 percent with a Very Favorable opinion and 48 percent with a Very Unfavorable one, making the law even less popular in Colorado than it is on the national level,” said Rasmussen Reports in its analysis.

Nationally, the split on Obamacare’s favorability rating is 44 percent favorable and 51 percent unfavorable, according to Rasmussen.

Those figures weren’t great news for Democratic Sen. Mark Udall, who voted in favor of the Affordable Care Act and has continued to support it. Meanwhile, Republicans have pounded him for his pro-Obamacare stance.

Generation Opportunity, a Koch-backed conservative group aimed at younger voters, released a fresh set of television and Internet ads in Colorado last week attacking Udall for his Obamacare vote, saying the health-care law with its heavy federal subsidies is destroying economic opportunity for those in their 20s.

“Sen. Mark Udall has waged a war on youth, plain and simple,” said Jonathan Lockwood, Generation Opportunity state director, in a statement.

“He votes against their interests all the time, whether it’s with Obamacare or an Internet sales tax. What’d they get? They got higher taxes, fewer jobs, and more debt. Obamacare is devastating and in Colorado, it has played out like a horror picture show,” Lockwood said.

The Rasmussen poll also found that President Obama’s approval rating has dipped from 49 to 45 percent since the March 11 survey. Meanwhile, his disapproval rating has ticked up from 50 percent to 53 percent.

Obamacare’s high disapproval rating in Colorado may be linked to the state’s health-care exchange, Connect for Health Colorado, which has drawn criticism this year for approving a raise and bonus for CEO Patty Fontneau while placing a tax on all health-insurance policies, even those obtained outside the program.

Republicans have called for an audit of the health-care exchange, but Senate Democrats killed an audit bill during the 2014 state legislative session.

Today’s announcement is yet another reminder that Senator Udall lied to Coloradans when he promised them if they liked their healthcare plan, they could keep it under Obamacare. Senator Udall’s vote for Obamacare has hurt Colorado families and resulted in more than 335,000 Coloradans receiving insurance cancelation notices. Not only is Senator Udall responsible for these cancelations, but he also shamefully tried to cover them up when the first batch of cancelations was originally announced. Colorado deserves better. It’s time for a Senator in Washington, D.C. who will stand up for us and not blindly follow President Obama.

Not enough, you want more facts?

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Obamacare:

(1) It's the law. (2) It will eventually evolved into single payer, maybe like the Australian system or something. (3) We have Medicaid anyway (and it does a decent job). (4) Can't keep your policy? Fine! It's probably garbage anyway (there are too many of them) (5) We have Medicare anyway. (6) Key Republicans want a mandate such as Romney, Dole, Nixon, Gingrich. (7) The National Review promoted a mandate.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Oh, I care for the truth. Let me know when you are ready to tell it.

I did, but in true liberal fashion, which never surprises me you guys don't want to or are extremely allergic to the truth.

0 ( +0 / -1 )

Lets see, despite the backward and illogical rants by the rush limbaugh crowd Obamacare has signed up millions of Americans faster than any predicted and lowered the cost of medical care at the same time. It is a huge incredible success and the republicans who have spend years now predicting the end of the world due to Obamacare are choking on its massive success.

This is yet another example of how the right wing types live in world where reality has no presence at all. All this is really is poorly hidden resentment of a fairer and more efficient way of delivery healthcare in the USA, like it is managed here in Japan, and also we cannot forget the republicans rejection of the black president despite the landslide victories. They named it Obamacare for a reason. Blackguycare was too blunt, even for them.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

As I said, study after study shows that it's doing well among the low income people because they are NOT paying for it, ask the average middle class American, it changes, but Zurc, don't believe it, after the Republicans take back the Senate and gain seats in the already controlled Republican House, maybe you and the other liberals that want to hide from the reality and see Obamacare for what it is, a huge piece of mungled bureaucratic piece of crap. At least would have to sit down with a majority led Republican congress if he really and truly wants to get anything done, in what wil be his newly appointed lame duck status.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

"...people like me will just either pay the fine or just leave"

Just leave what? The country?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

people like me will just either pay the fine or just leave"

Just leave what? The country?

The fine is taken from federal tax return. If they want to leave, they are entitled to do so .That's freedom.. It is their loss, not ours.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Lets see, despite the backward and illogical rants by the rush limbaugh crowd Obamacare has signed up millions of Americans faster than any predicted and lowered the cost of medical care at the same time

Published figures must be taken with a fair helping of salt. Official unemployment figures go down while the number of people without jobs increase? Such is the fantasyworld of government statistics. Too bad I can't use the same formulas to describe my business to my creditors, but if I did, I would be tossed in jail.

I am neither a democrat or a republican, I am a liberal of the old type, who wishes to be free of fetters, and to be in cotrol of my own life and future, for better or worse. The two-party system is a tool used to divide and distract the stupid.

I would be fine with a national healthcare system, welfare system, or pension system if these could be run efficiently. But nothing our governments do is efficient. Whenever these policies have been enacted, they have become a bait-and-switch. Obamacare's costs will be far higher than what was promised when it was passed. The costs are already much more than originally estimated, and the act has only been partially implemented. Healthcare cost have not been reduced, projected increases have been reduced, which is a dofferent matter altogether.

This year America will spend $1.3 trillion on healthcare, which is more than $8000 for every person in America. This is far higer than any other country on earth, and 40% more than Norway (which is second largest per-capita healthcare spender). Most of this $1.3 trillion will be absorbed by government bureaucracy and administration. Much is diverted to politically-friendly contractors, like the many millions paid to the company which developed the comically faulty "healthcare.gov" website. Little money is left over to actually pay for the care of those who need it. It is utterly abaurd.

This ineffiency and waste is unacceptable, and any program like Obamacare which promotes and perpetuates such ineffeciency and waste is also unacceptable.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

"and any program like Obamacare which promotes and perpetuates such ineffeciency and waste is also unacceptable."

Do you see ObamaCare as a bridge to single payer acceptable? I do.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Do you see ObamaCare as a bridge to single payer acceptable? I do.

A governmnent-administered, single-payer system will not be acceptable if it is run as poorly as other government programs, all of which are rife with waste, inefficiency, graft, and corruption. In America monopolies have long been illegal, and a goverment monopoly on healthcare is no less bad than any private monopoly.

Here in Japan I subscribe to the national healthcare system, which is rather inadequate in terms of treatment, facilities, and the like. Ryu Sakamoto preferred to avoid being treated for cancer in Japan, and is now undergoing treatment in America. Other wealthy people from Europe, Canada, and Asia do the same. This says volumes about the quality of national health care systems available in their home countries, and they can afford to pay for the best care available at home.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

This ineffiency and waste is unacceptable, and any program like Obamacare which promotes and perpetuates such ineffeciency and waste is also unacceptable.

You may change your mind.

Thirty-three states in the United States have hesitated to implement the Affordable Care Act, also called Obamacare. They have not done the staff work to decide whether to offer their own state-level health insurance exchange (for those who are not covered by employer plans) or whether to participate in an exchange plan run by the federal government. Time has run out. The deadline for them to decide is today (November 16, 2012.) Governors and state legislatures need to stop procrastinating and start implementing, or their businesses—both large and small—will suffer.

I am in Colorado and the system is working very well here as well as Minnesota, Washington. Here is more info on State of Well Being by each states. The fact speaks lauder. Our state is also the thinnest state in the nation.

http://info.healthways.com/wbi2013

These states show the highest efficiency and quality in health care. I am very fortunate I am in one of the highest state in the nation. The care here is a cream of crop with the best professionals.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The fine is taken from federal tax return. If they want to leave, they are entitled to do so .That's freedom.. It is their loss, not ours.

No, it's the country's loss when people like me and the 1% all leave! Where would you get your tax revenues from then. The country depends on the wealthy to provide job and pay taxes, if we are overtaxed, we can always relocate, most Americans cannot do this. So yes, it would be the country's loss, not ours.

@sangetsu

I am neither a democrat or a republican, I am a liberal of the old type, who wishes to be free of fetters, and to be in cotrol of my own life and future, for better or worse. The two-party system is a tool used to divide and distract the stupid.

Excellent point. Totally agree.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

No, it's the country's loss when people like me and the 1% all leave! Where would you get your tax revenues from then

The freedom comes with the right and the responsibility. The freedom is not free.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@Stranger

Socialism is a balance between individual rights, and group responsibility. It allows for the rights of the individual, while also providing for the greater good.

Yet for some reason the rights of the many always take precedence over the rights of the individual. For example, the attempt to force the religious to pay for abortions that they believe to be morally repugnant. Luckily the Supreme Court stopped that one but others are not so lucky. Currently, the Obama administration is trying to force a bunch of old catholic nuns to go against their religious beliefs or they will be forced to stop providing charity to the less fortunate. That is not what I would call balance. If the system is so great it should not have to force people to participate.

It is the job of the US federal government to 'promote the general welfare.' It is not it's job to 'provide' for it in the way that it must provide for the common defense. It is also not it's job to define down to the smallest detail what the general welfare is (as in mandating that x number of abortifacients must be covered by the health care plan of every citizen including men and little old nuns).

Obamacare is Socialism through government enforced regulation of every facet of the health care system. I think charity is great as long as the government is not forcing it upon the people whether they want it or not. There is no opt out of Obamacare. A CNN poll out today shows that 59% of Americans are against it. It is already a huge failure and is only supported by the true believers of the Messiah Obama. It is now all about defending the cult of Obama; His followers are unyielding in there defense of the man they believe will "heal the planet". Yes, those are his own words. America needs to begin thinking beyond ObamaCare to a new system that allows for the maximum amount of individual choice.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Obamacare is Socialism through government enforced regulation of every facet of the health care system.

And that's what makes it great!

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

"A governmnent-administered, single-payer system will not be acceptable if it is run as poorly as other government programs" But seniors say "Hands off my Medicare" as if they are satisfied with that. But what other "poorly" run government programs are you talking about, specifically?

"which is rather inadequate in terms of treatment, facilities, and the like." Please be more specific. How are they inadequate? What happened to you?

"Ryu Sakamoto preferred to avoid being treated for cancer in Japan, and is now undergoing treatment in America. Other wealthy people from Europe, Canada, and Asia do the same. " But many Americans leave the USA to seek treatment as well. It's a two way street and it's not just about cost. Some rich Americans go to private British hospitals (where the docs trained in the public system). And American woman came to Japan for stomach cancer treatment and paid cash for it. Lots of stories like that. Yes, many people go to America for private treatment. But also people come to other countries such as Japan and the UK. Medical innovations happen both inside and outside the USA. There is nothing special about healthcare in the USA compared to other developed countries. So please let us know specifically what happened to you with your unfortunate experience in Japan's medical system. How would it have been different in the USA?

"I am neither a democrat or a republican" And that's why you will always be frustrated. Both parties want to move forward with Obama/Romneycare and there is no other legitimate party with the power to reverse this.

"Obamacare is Socialism through government enforced regulation of every facet of the health care system." There is the other side of medical bills not being paid or the existence of junk insurance policies (policies that don't work and it's not like having insurance at all). But we are forced to pay into Medicare anyway. No one has anything to say anything about that?

"developed the comically faulty "healthcare.gov" website." But that can be fixed very fast. Also, they didn't hire a competent contractor to do the job well due to political pressure. If they had hired IBM (which runs many government systems well) it would have been a different story - this was an IT business case study.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Currently, the Obama administration is trying to force a bunch of old catholic nuns to go against their religious beliefs or they will be forced to stop providing charity to the less fortunate.

Your post is inaccurate. They are called "Nuns on the Bus" and it is a non profit INDEPENDENT organization. These good hearted nun's main focus is well aligned with the Pope Francis. They have been fighting against inequality, poverty and social injustice for years. You are trying to link it to Obama, but you are trying to distort the truth.

If the system is so great it should not have to force people to participate.

You are paying tax for your own SSI and unemployment insurance, don't you? It is called a Social Responsibility.

Obamacare is Socialism through government enforced regulation of every facet of the health care system

Socialism is misunderstood by many. Most developed and developing countries are somewhere between pure Capitalism and Socialism in economic scale. There is no country of pure Capitalism on the face of globe.

I think charity is great as long as the government is not forcing it upon the people whether they want it or not.

Why not? Most Americans are contributing to SSI and unemployment insurance, and they become very handy in time of crisis and disability. Many are not so lucky like you and bass.

America needs to begin thinking beyond ObamaCare to a new system that allows for the maximum amount of individual choice

GOP never came up with their own version of healthcare plan. They have been doing nothing but beating a drum. NADA! Please tell your congressmen to go back to work, will ya?

SUMMARY

So far, those who speak against the SSI, unemployment and Obamacare are the ones who need the most help from the government. I find it very interesting.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Oh, one more thing about the myth that ALL rich non-Americans go to the USA for treatment. In the last few years two members of royalty had heart surgery. One was the king of Saudi Arabia and of course he went to the USA because I would guess the Saudi system might be a bit below first world standard. But the emperor of Japan had his heart surgery in Japan. Personally if I were rich I would want to go to an English speaking hospital in a country like the USA or the UK due to the language. Also, due to physiological differences of various races I would like to go to a doctor that has more experience dealing with people of my race. But don't just trash other countries' healthcare systems. Is USA really the best of the best? Did it save Steve Jobs? Are people really living longer there? Because even in the more developed parts of China the Chinese are living longer than Americans now. And they are preparing to go universal in 2020. So which system really deserves to be trashed?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Socialism is a balance between individual rights, and group responsibility. It allows for the rights of the individual, while also providing for the greater good.

Socialism works only in the world of insects among bees, ants, termites. It doesn't work among human beings, and never has. There is no way to determine exactly what "the greater good" actually is. Socialism goes completely against the right of the indiividual, it it no way whatsoever allows for the rights of the individual. "The common good" must always trump the right of the individual, or socialism won't work, period.

People are individuals, of different races, languages, strengths, and abilities. Their needs, wants, amd desires are as different as their appearances. There is no shoe which fits all, and for that one reason alone, socialism is doomed to fail. Man mistakenly thinks that nature, and human nature, can be overruled by something as shallow and empty as religion or political ideology. The competitive nature of man's animal part drives him to acquire territory, property, sex, etc, and this occurs regardless of any political or religious system. The top 1% exist in every and all societies and systems. The problem with socialism is that it requires an iron hand to overcome human desire and individuality to make everyone work for "the common good." This iron hand does not affect the top 1%, but it utterly enslaves the remaining 99%. For it's numerous faults, capitalism at least allows anyone with the drive or ability to rise to the top. Capitalism gets it's strength from the competitive nature of people, and as such, and while not perfect (nothing is perfect) it is the most natural system we have found.

Socialism purports to provide for the common good, but that is nonsense. Socialism has failed every test which time and experience has ever applied to it, be it Maoism in China, Communism the Soviet Union, or National Socialism in Hitler's Germany. No ideology every dreamed up by man has caused more death and despair than socialism, yet, like with other nutty religions, it still has fervent believers. As Santa Ana said, "those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

Milder forms of the socialism like that practiced in Attlee's England failed, and the systems used in Scandinavia have become more limited in recent years as their full consequences have begun to be felt. We have seen the errosion of socialism in places like Vietnam, where capitalism is becoming the dominant system, and even Cuba is beginning to see things change. The only example of a thoroughly socialistic country is North Korea, and not even the most ardent believers in socialism will mention North Korea when talking about it's pros and cons.

Politicians love socialism because it gives them control of all land, all services, and all businesses, and by extension, this gives them control of all people. In no system is the potential for totalitarianism greater than in socialism. This is why it must not be tolerated.

It is not the government's job to take care of us, that is our own responsibility. The shifting of personal responsibility must always include the shifting of personal rights.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

"National Socialism in Hitler's Germany." It's just healthcare. It's not the 2nd coming of Hitler.

Here is another non-American medical success story since some believe that America is the only country people come to for reliable healthcare (and I have more): A Russian girl who had bone cancer in the leg was facing amputation. She went to the UK for a new experimental surgery where they removed the cancerous bone and zapped it (to kill the cancer and the bone itself) then put it back in her leg. Since that part of the bone was dead it could no longer function as bone usually does. However, the dead bone remained there for healthy bone to grow around it and her leg made a fully recovery. Pioneered in the UK.

I'm still waiting to hear how other countries' health care systems are clearly inferior to America's. I might accept that argument if the average lifespan in the USA was 110, but it's not.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Socialism works only in the world of insects among bees, ants, termites. It doesn't work among human beings, and never has.

There are numerous socialist countries in the world, and many more that exist somewhere between socialism and capitalism that do just fine. Many of those have a higher standard of living than both the US and China.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

sangetsu03Jul. 27, 2014 - 02:56PM JST

Socialism works only in the world of insects among bees, ants, termites. It doesn't work among human beings, and never has. There is no way to determine exactly what "the greater good" actually is. Socialism goes completely against the right of the indiividual, it it no way whatsoever allows for the rights of the individual. "The common good" must always trump the right of the individual, or socialism won't work, period.

I believe that you are referring to the Individual Sector in economic scale. I agree.

Socialism purports to provide for the common good, but that is nonsense. Socialism has failed every test which time and experience has ever applied to it, be it Maoism in China, Communism the Soviet Union, or National Socialism in Hitler's Germany. No ideology every dreamed up by man has caused more death and despair than socialism, yet, like with other nutty religions, it still has fervent believers. As Santa Ana said, "those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

Here you are referring to the Public Sector in economic scale. You are mixing up the Public sector to the Individual sector. As I have mentioned, the public sector has a special focus on common good for the people in society. Without the social infrastructure maintained by the federal or state governments, the interstate commerce will be very limited. These include Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, Federal Grants, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare and Obamacare. As I said before, most developed and developing countries are somewhere between pure capitalism and socialism. You may be surprised to hear that includes the United States of America.

There are three sectors in economics; individual, private and public sectors. Each sector has a special function and focus to maximize their roles. It is very important to know the difference.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@stranger

And that's what makes it great!

Most socialists would think so.

@global

You are paying tax for your own SSI and unemployment insurance, don't you? It is called a Social Responsibility.

Yes, but I don't have to pay for everyone else, also, it won't be too much longer before SSI will fade away like Obamacare (hopefully) will one day.

So far, those who speak against the SSI, unemployment and Obamacare are the ones who need the most help from the government. I find it very interesting.

I speak out against it and NO, I don't need and wouldn't take anything from the government.

most developed and developing countries are somewhere between pure capitalism and socialism. You may be surprised to hear that includes the United States of America.

Problem with that is, the country is going downhill because it has since the Sainted anointed one took office, the country has become MORE dependent on Social welfare programs and dangerously expanded entitlement programs which are a disaster for the country. I want less a lot less of the socialism and the radicalization of enforcing more entitlements on the American people. That is not what we are about. Again, I could give a flying fig about what France does or their healthcare system.

@stranger

There are numerous socialist countries in the world, and many more that exist somewhere between socialism and capitalism that do just fine. Many of those have a higher standard of living than both the US and China.

They do, they have freedom of speech and the freedom to do as they please. Which countries?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Most socialists would think so.

Exactly.

Problem with that is, the country is going downhill because it has since the Sainted anointed one took office

More voices from the bubble.

They do, they have freedom of speech and the freedom to do as they please. Which countries?

Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Canada, UK etc.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Exactly.

That's why I would never live in those countries and when his majesty retires, hopefully we can get back on track and embrace Capitalism the way it was meant to be.

More voices from the bubble.

And once again, the truth hurts so badly.

Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Canada, UK etc.

I spent enough time in those countries, particularly in Scandinavia, but I would never want to move there, nor am I envious of them whatsoever. They are used to paying high taxes, they grew up with it, they are ok with it. We are NOT Scandinavia. They also have an out of control drug problem because of their FREE for all everything. I don't want to pay for someone else's bad decision. You want to get high, shoot up, fine by me, just don't ask me to pay for it. Just buying a beer alone would turn me off of ever moving there. Also, I have heard many people from these quasi-socialist countries complaining about their precious socialized healthcare and I too, lived under the system while I was growing up in Germany and it wasn't all that it's cracked up to be.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

That's why I would never live in those countries and when his majesty retires, hopefully we can get back on track and embrace Capitalism the way it was meant to be

You mean where 1% of the people hold over 60% of the wealth? Sounds great - if you're that 1%. Otherwise it's crap.

I spent enough time in those countries, particularly in Scandinavia, but I would never want to move there, nor am I envious of them whatsoever.

I don't know why not - they all have a higher standard of living than the US.

They also have an out of control drug problem because of their FREE for all everything.

You act as if your own country does not have an out of control drug problem.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

"They are used to paying high taxes" Switzerland? Are you sure?

ObamaCare will be fine. In fact years later it will be called nothing, perhaps just Medicare (for all). Obama will be long forgotten by then.

"That's why I would never live in those countries" What will you do (with regards to deciding to live in the USA or not) IF ObamaCare goes completely the direction you don't want it to?

It's going through because so many Republicans have the same idea. In fact the Republicans invented ObamaCare.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

bass4funkJul. 27, 2014 - 10:12AM JST

A Rasmussen Reports survey released Tuesday found only 39 percent of Colorado voters polled approve of the Affordable Care Act, while a whopping 58 percent disapprove

Rasmussen Reports are not reliable. They messed up the stats very badly and predicted Romney is a winner. Rasmussen is funded by the right wing groups. So I do not rely on their say. Thanks for all the info, however, There are many other papers besides Denver Post and they have different opinions..

Generation Opportunity, a Koch-backed conservative group aimed at younger voters, released a fresh set of television and Internet ads in Colorado last week attacking Udall for his Obamacare vote, saying the health-care law with its heavy federal subsidies is destroying economic opportunity for those in their 20s.

Again, this is a fault analysis. It's probably written by no brainers.

Actually the report is incorrect, more and more young female voters are attracted to Udall as Udall has just introduced a bill two weeks ago repealing US Supreme Court decision of Hobby Lobby Case. Gardner's position against abortion is very unreal and unreasonable. If women are raped, women cannot get abortion. If they break the law to abort,, they will be charged with murder, possibly sent to jail for life. Women do not like that.

Today’s announcement is yet another reminder that Senator Udall lied to Coloradans when he promised them if they liked their healthcare plan, they could keep it under Obamacare. Senator Udall’s vote for Obamacare has hurt Colorado families and resulted in more than 335,000 Coloradans receiving insurance cancelation notices. Not only is Senator Udall responsible for these cancelations, but he also shamefully tried to cover them up when the first batch of cancelations was originally announced. Colorado deserves better. It’s time for a Senator in Washington, D.C. who will stand up for us and not blindly follow President Obama.

This is not true, Please provide me with a name of journalist who is responsible for this inaccurate writing, sigh.....

0 ( +1 / -1 )

"I too, lived under the system while I was growing up in Germany and it wasn't all that it's cracked up to be." Can you be more specific? This is the second critical comment about medical systems that are subpar compared to the American system but with no specifics. To make these comments more credible they need to be backed up with what actually happened. But compared to what happened to Michael Jackson I don't see how the German system can be worse than the American system.

"just don't ask me to pay for it." But you are. You are paying a much higher price with the war on drugs and the cost of incarceration. Switzerland tries to wean people off narcotics instead of throwing them in the can. It's much cheaper and more effective. By the way, Switzerland has a pretty low crime rate with no war on drugs. For the Swiss it's an economic decision. Because as an American you are paying for all that free housing drug for the drug offenders. Which would you rather pay for. Cheaper drug intervention or the more expensive incarceration?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

A governmnent-administered, single-payer system will not be acceptable if it is run as poorly as other government programs, all of which are rife with waste, inefficiency, graft, and corruption.

Obamacare, medicare, and other subsidies do not and will not make healthcare more easily affordable or available.

@ sangetsu03

I concur completely. Yet even if you take the trouble to explain the facts real slow, and provide the numbers (as you have done so admirably here) socialists will just stick their fingers in their ears and tell you that their health care system is something everyone "can be justifiably proud of". Its amazing just to read this thread and see people arguing things about which they have no clue, with people who are obviously more informed. Worse still, when they are proven wrong they don't even bat an eye, instead they glibly continue on, calling anyone who doesn't espouse the socialist agenda a "no brainer".

I am neither a democrat or a republican, I am a liberal of the old type, who wishes to be free of fetters, and to be in cotrol of my own life and future, for better or worse.

Concur again. I would only add that I also wish to be free of the obligation to assist in paying for others who are making no attempt whatsoever to uphold their portion of the social contract. Those folks legitimately in need (and that certainly doesn't include citizens of foreign nations) should receive a helping hand. Everyone else should pay their share or go without.

Socialism works only in the world of insects among bees, ants, termites. It doesn't work among human beings, and never has. There is no way to determine exactly what "the greater good" actually is. Socialism goes completely against the right of the individual, it it no way whatsoever allows for the rights of the individual. "The common good" must always trump the right of the individual, or socialism won't work, period.

Well said. Its astonishing to me that there are people - people theoretically paying attention to world events and economic realities - that feel no shame in trumpeting the "success" of socialism around the world. I guess the board is anonymous, so ....

Reality says there few if any socialist countries that have not either failed already, or find themselves pretty much irreversibly far along the path to that end.

globalwatcher and strangerland ... embarrassing stuff guys. sangetsu03 is shredding you.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@stranger

You mean where 1% of the people hold over 60% of the wealth? Sounds great - if you're that 1%. Otherwise it's crap.

It's NOT my fault that I worked hard and never had a silver spoon in my mouth and I found out very early in life, no one cares about you when you are down and out and the only way you're going to make it is through hard work, sacrifice and determination. Now if you are sick, can't work or have some physical disabilities that prevent you from bumming off society, that can't be helped and we should help those people, but otherwise, if you blew your chance in life, who's fault is that? Certainly NOT mine, nor anyone else's. You have millions of foreigners coming to the US to make it and many do, even from Canada and those Scandinavia countries as well to make a better life, even with our NOT so great (Now it's not) healthcare system. I make NO apologies for having a good life, I earned every penny of it. So yeah, I love the Capitalist system, it's the fairest competitive system that made the US a great country.

I don't know why not - they all have a higher standard of living than the US.

That depends on what your definition of what "standard living" is? Also, keep in mind. Sweden has a population of about 9 million, Norway 5 million, Switzerland 8 million, Canada 35 million, UK 64 million, none of these countries have 318 million plus, there is NO way, you can have a governmental healthcare system that can successfully give proper low cost care to everyone the way you think, government can't control anything well anyway. Every time they stick their hands into something **** happens, every single time. I would never have had a problem with Obama trying to fix the system for the people that didn't have health insurance, but to completely change and overhaul everyone else's??? I had a great plan until this guy ruined it, not only for me, but for millions of other Americans that had Zero problems with their healthcare plan.

You act as if your own country does not have an out of control drug problem.

Oh, please, Europe has an equally bad drug problem, even in socialist Scandinavia and other parts of Europe.

@global

Rasmussen Reports are not reliable. They messed up the stats very badly and predicted Romney is a winner. Rasmussen is funded by the right wing groups. So I do not rely on their say. Thanks for all the info, however, There are many other papers besides Denver Post and they have different opinions..

A review of polling on Real Clear Politics shows that Rasmussen Polls are measurably more favorable to President Obama than all other polling. The release continued, "The Company emphasized that Mr. Rasmussen's legacy remains intact. His polling methodologies and protocols, widely acknowledged as among the most accurate and reliable in the industry, continue to guide and inform the company’s public opinion survey techniques. In addition, the editorial culture of excellence that he built is still very much in place.

This is not true, Please provide me with a name of journalist who is responsible for this inaccurate writing, sigh.....

No, it's very accurate and very true and the source is from various papers in Colorado. Denver Post being one of them, NY Times and they aren't exactly liberal. Whether you want to believe the reports or not, it's your choice. However, the Denver Post, NY times, Colorado peak politics, Forbes and many more. These are liberal papers with NO axe to grind, point is, I can show you more, news after news after news that what you are saying in Colorado is NOT true about Obamacare. You keep talking how good it is, and I will debunk it. Again, don't spin. Obamacare for some people is great and they are happy with it, but the majority of Americans are frustrated to say the least with it. That's NOT my opinion, it's the people living in Colorado. Also, most women that like and would vote for Udall would be single women, because they favor entitlements, however, it changes once we talk about married women who increasingly opposed to it.

I concur completely. Yet even if you take the trouble to explain the facts real slow, and provide the numbers (as you have done so admirably here) socialists will just stick their fingers in their ears and tell you that their health care system is something everyone "can be justifiably proud of". Its amazing just to read this thread and see people arguing things about which they have no clue, with people who are obviously more informed. Worse still, when they are proven wrong they don't even bat an eye, instead they glibly continue on, calling anyone who doesn't espouse the socialist agenda a "no brainer".

Exactly my point. He said it best, and yet, there are still some people that believe Elvis is still alive.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

But I'm still waiting to hear about the specifics. What is so inferior with non-American medical systems? And how would a single payer system "not be acceptable"? It's evolving in that direction anyway and that's conservatism. What is all this "waste, inefficiency, graft, and corruption" specifically?

"see people arguing things about which they have no clue" Well, I know you are not talking about me since I have given specific examples instead of accusing everyone of being "socialist"

"Everyone else should pay their share" There you go, I"m all for a mandate and I don't care which political party fully implements that. Don't forget ObamaCare was a Republican idea.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@Strangerland

And that's what makes it great!

Well at least you are willing to admit you are a Socialist. If Obamacare provides balance and presumably protections for the rights of individuals, what mechanisms exist to ensure balance? No has identified these to my knowledge.

@globalwatcher

Your post is inaccurate. They are called "Nuns on the Bus" and it is a non profit INDEPENDENT organization.

The Little Sisters of the Poor and the group you mention are not one in the same. I've found links to their websites below. So I believe that you are mistaken.

http://www.littlesistersofthepoor.org/ http://www.networklobby.org/node/789

You are trying to link it to Obama, but you are trying to distort the truth. The Little Sisters have a lawsuit against Obamacare: http://www.becketfund.org/littlesisters/ . You are obfuscating.

You are paying tax for your own SSI and unemployment insurance, don't you? It is called a Social Responsibility.

I am paying for these things because I have no choice and if I did refuse I would be jailed. That's called coercion. Is your idea of pluralism coercion? I happen to like the idea of unemployment insurance and would voluntarily contribute to it in order to benefit from it should I become unemployed. Can't I be allowed to decide what services I would like from government? Voluntary contribution to charity is Social Responsibility. In a pluralistic society, the majority forcing the minority to contribute money to promote their political ideology is not Social Responsibility, it is dictatorial. It relies on government one size fits all solutions that limit choice and freedom.

Most developed and developing countries are somewhere between pure Capitalism and Socialism in economic scale. There is no country of pure Capitalism on the face of globe.

Except for maybe North Korea and Cuba that is true.

Why not? Most Americans are contributing to SSI and unemployment insurance, and they become very handy in time of crisis and disability. Many are not so lucky like you and bass.

Because I would prefer to support charities that I think are important and not the one's that you might. I would also argue that I know better how to take responsibility for myself than a nameless bureaucratic in a far off capital.

GOP never came up with their own version of healthcare plan.

I'm not a Republican but as a conservative I would prefer to work with the private market to come up with my own healthcare plan with benefits that suit my needs. I would be happy to contribute voluntarily to help the poor and disabled with their care.

So far, those who speak against the SSI, unemployment and Obamacare are the ones who need the most help from the government. I find it very interesting.

First of all, that statement is illogical. Have you considered that when people are coerced into contributing into a government program that they are forced to go to the government in order to get their money back. Social security is a great example of this dilemma. The government takes your many for decades and puts it into a program that we will know is insolvent over the long term. Do you expect them to not want their money back?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

"I'm not a Republican but as a conservative I would prefer to work with the private market to come up with my own healthcare plan with benefits that suit my needs. I would be happy to contribute voluntarily to help the poor and disabled with their care." When Romney was running for president he said a "mandate" would "promote responsibility" by "reducing freeloading" at the hospitals which is "conservative". So according to a real conservative running for president a "mandate" is the solution. It seems clear to me and Romney is the real deal when it comes to conservatism.

But what's the difference between a Republican and a Conservative?

Bush II had the idea of privatizing SS but the idea fell through. The main reason is what happens if the private system fails? That's right the public system has to back it up anyway. The real solution is (1) raising retirement ages as UK did to 69 (2) increase contributions. What else can be done for people in their 80s who are too old to work but need money as long as they are breathing? SS is not a pretty sight. But it's better than old people pooping on the street. No one else has a viable alternative solution in any country. You can complain about it but you cannot avoid SS.

"I would be happy to contribute voluntarily to help the poor and disabled with their care." Are you wealthy? (I know bass4funk is because he personally knows two people who are CEOs of Fortune 500 companies - check his post history for proof) Would you have enough to pay for someone's cancer treatment that can often cost in the 100s of thousands of dollars. If so then good for you! You are a generous individual.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

A review of polling on Real Clear Politics shows that Rasmussen Polls are measurably more favorable to President Obama than all other polling.

Well, you are not at front line as well as I am. We campaign teams have dropped and discarded Rasmussen Polls completely. As you can see they are listed at the 24th almost to the bottom. We were comparing their polls like a hawk, often times, they were all off. I am speaking from my experience in the past. They were certainly wrong on Colorado polls for the presidential election until the last minutes. THEY WERE BAD.

http://www.politisite.com/2012/11/07/analysis-most-accurate-political-polls-from-2012-presidential-election/

I am paying for these things because I have no choice and if I did refuse I would be jailed

I do not think you are kidding yourself. You are excused to file tax returns to the Fed/State governments as you live in Japan. Sounds like you do not work for US corporation in Japan. You need to talk to your CPA.

I happen to like the idea of unemployment insurance and would voluntarily contribute to it in order to benefit from it should I become unemployed

You do not contribute anything as you do not pay tax to the US government as well as SSI. You are not accumulating nothing for your retirement.

I'm not a Republican but as a conservative I would prefer to work with the private market to come up with my own healthcare plan with benefits that suit my needs. I would be happy to contribute voluntarily to help the poor and disabled with their care. Go ahead, bhahaha. It will give you insurance until you get sick.

Again, you are not qualified to get it through Obamacare as you are not paying tax to the US government. You are in Japan, so you are covered by Japanese National Healthcare system. So when you come back to the States for visit, you do not have US healthcare non insured.

NY Times and they aren't exactly liberal

Forbes

Whoat? I guess you are not extracting their ideology, I have nothing else to say on this. LOL

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Well, you are not at front line as well as I am. We campaign teams have dropped and discarded Rasmussen Polls completely. As you can see they are listed at the 24th almost to the bottom. We were comparing their polls like a hawk, often times, they were all off. I am speaking from my experience in the past. They were certainly wrong on Colorado polls for the presidential election until the last minutes. THEY WERE BAD.

Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen wrote that Rasmussen has an “unchallenged record for both integrity and accuracy.

Slate Magazine and The Wall Street Journal reported that Rasmussen Reports was one of the most accurate polling firms for the 2004 United States presidential election and 2006 United States general elections.

In 2004 Slate magazine "publicly doubted and privately derided" Rasmussen's use of recorded voices in electoral polls. However, after the election, they concluded that Rasmussen’s polls were among the most accurate in the 2004 presidential election.

According to Politico, Rasmussen's 2008 presidential-election polls "closely mirrored the election's outcome."

Global, stop! Please, every network from CNN, NPR, even the Obama network msnbc and even the BBC uses Rassmusen was one of the most reliable polling agencies, if you don't like it, just say so, but they are credible regardless of what some liberals might FEEL, it's the facts that are relevant.

You do not contribute anything as you do not pay tax to the US government as well as SSI. You are not accumulating nothing for your retirement.

Excuse me, but how do you know what I pay or don't pay? You can't say that. You don't know anything about me.

Again, you are not qualified to get it through Obamacare as you are not paying tax to the US government. You are in Japan, so you are covered by Japanese National Healthcare system. So when you come back to the States for visit, you do not have US healthcare non insured.

I would really appreciate it if you would kindly refrain from making unsubstantiated guesses as to how I run my life.

Whoat? I guess you are not extracting their ideology, I have nothing else to say on this. LOL

You can't get more liberal than the NYT.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Global, stop! Please, every network from CNN, NPR, even the Obama network msnbc and even the BBC uses Rassmusen was one of the most reliable polling agencies, if you don't like it, just say so, but they are credible regardless of what some liberals might FEEL, it's the facts that are relevant

Let me put it this way, so that you understand more clearly. We do not rely on their polls too much. Their method is somewhat biased because they are getting a financial support from the right wings. Believe or not, we have a research stats on their polling as well.

Excuse me, but how do you know what I pay or don't pay? You can't say that. You don't know anything about me.

If you are in Japan working for US subsidiary or Japanese company, you are excused for US tax return. You are required to file tax returns to Japanese government. So you are not doing any favor to yourself and for your future. When you come and visit US, you come here uninsured.

NY Times and they aren't exactly liberal.

This is from your post.

NYT is a liberal newspaper.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Italy doesn't have a population of over 360 million plus people, add to that a couple of a million illegal aliens, there's not way financially we can afford to give and offer FREE....

Maybe your government should spend less in wars and more in welfare? We have tons of illegal immigrants as well.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

"I would really appreciate it if you would kindly refrain from making unsubstantiated guesses as to how I run my life." But you are a media executive with a very high salary and travel around the world on business. Right not you are not paying for ObamaCare anyway.

"Italy doesn't have a population of over 360 million plus people" So what's the problem. It simply means there are more people using the system AND paying into the system. Net immigration from Mexico is reversing anyway. It's taking care of itself with Mexico's higher GDP growth, in these recent years.

Don't forget that ObamaCare was Republican idea

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Let me put it this way, so that you understand more clearly. We do not rely on their polls too much. Their method is somewhat biased because they are getting a financial support from the right wings. Believe or not, we have a research stats on their polling as well.

I'm glad to hear you say that, Bush felt the same, Obama feels the same, then both parties need not worry too much what the polls, say keep working do as you do and when the voters fire you, then you'll realize, maybe you should've heeded the polls just a tad. My research stats are the American voters.

If you are in Japan working for US subsidiary or Japanese company, you are excused for US tax return. You are required to file tax returns to Japanese government. So you are not doing any favor to yourself and for your future. When you come and visit US, you come here uninsured.

I don't care about that. I pay as I go, that's NOT a problem for me.

Maybe your government should spend less in wars and more in welfare? We have tons of illegal immigrants as well.

No, I think we should cut more of the overblown entitlements and part of that is giving aid to foreign aid to many of these countries, that for some reason can't keep their people under control.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

bass4funk you said you have two friends who are CEOs of American fortune 500 companies (as confirmed by your post history). What do they think of ObamaCare? How has it had an impact on their companies?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I'm still waiting to hear how other countries' health care systems are clearly inferior to America's. I might accept that argument if the average lifespan in the USA was 110, but it's not.

My mother was diagnosed with stage three breast cancer in America a few years ago, a co-worker of mine in Japan was diagnosed withnstage three breast cancer two years ago.

My mother's hospital scheduled surgery to be performed the same day she was diagnosed. My Japanese co-worker needed to wait nearly two months for surgery. My mother's cancer was successfully treated, and went into remission. My Japanes co-worker is still fighting with the disease.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

My mother's hospital scheduled surgery to be performed the same day she was diagnosed. My Japanese co-worker needed to wait nearly two months for surgery. My mother's cancer was successfully treated, and went into remission. My Japanes co-worker is still fighting with the disease.

I heard many, many stories like that, having lived under socialized medicine, thank God for the US of A. I hope your mother is doing well.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

No, I think we should cut more of the overblown entitlements and part of that is giving aid to foreign aid to many of these countries, that for some reason can't keep their people under control.

I fear you have been brainwashed, if you don't know the real role that your country plays in many countries' political instability. Anyway, the US should also change their food culture. Your food is rubbish, no offense. Italian people have healthy food, we are slim and our average lifespan is one of the highest in the world also thanks to this.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Many of those have a higher standard of living than both the US and China.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

I'm glad to hear you say that, Bush felt the same, Obama feels the same, then both parties need not worry too much what the polls, say keep working do as you do and when the voters fire you, then you'll realize, maybe you should've heeded the polls just a tad. My research stats are the American voters.

We evaluate all methods, but we are not focusing too much on the polls from Rasmussen. . The polls are not just a fad, it is all about science.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I'm still waiting to hear how other countries' health care systems are clearly inferior to America's. I might accept that argument if the average lifespan in the USA was 110, but it's not.

Here in Japan Today there are several stories each year of ambulances running from hospital to hospital with an emergency patient, because these hospitals have reached their quota of patients, and cannot accept another. Many Japanese people die each year because they cannot get timely treatment. A few years ago a pregnant Japanese woman died after being refused admittance by seven hospitals. The year before another pregnant woman died after being refused by twenty hospitals. A 75 year old Japanese man died after 25 hospitals refused him 36 times.

In America, a hospital may not refuse emergency victims, period.

One of the reasons Japanese people live in the cities is because hospitals and healthcare in rural areas are poor.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

When Romney was running for president he said a "mandate" would "promote responsibility" by "reducing freeloading" at the hospitals which is "conservative".

But what's the difference between a Republican and a Conservative?

The reason I do not identify myself as a Republican is because of men like Romney. He is no conservative or constitutionalist. The use of a mandate, or government coercion, is immoral. Responsibility is to hold individuals accountable for their own health care. The idea of a mandate requires only those that can pay to be responsible. Therefore, it is simply another name for the involuntary redistribution of wealth. It does not trouble me if people were to join together voluntarily and impose a mandate on themselves.

Bush II had the idea of privatizing SS but the idea fell through. The main reason is what happens if the private system fails? That's right the public system has to back it up anyway.

Bush II did not want to privatize SS. At best it was a partial privatization of a small portion if a person elected to do it. It was at least a step in the right direction with an eye towards long term sustainability and providing citizens choice. The reason the idea fell through is because Democrats refused to negotiate with Bush or even discuss reform and sustainability. You know, the same thing Obama whines about today. Republicans learned this strategy from Democrats and Nancy Pelosi.

The main reason this is necessary is because what happens when SS fails? We know it will fail because the numbers don't lie. Raising the age of retirement only delays the inevitable reform that will finally make the system sustainable. Obamacare is making these problems worse because it squeezes out sources to allow them to remain solvent. A disaster is coming. It's just a question of whether it will happen in my lifetime or not.

"I would be happy to contribute voluntarily to help the poor and disabled with their care." Are you wealthy? (I know bass4funk is because he personally knows two people who are CEOs of Fortune 500 companies - check his post history for proof) Would you have enough to pay for someone's cancer treatment that can often cost in the 100s of thousands of dollars. If so then good for you! You are a generous individual.

No, I am not wealthy. No I do not have enough to pay for someone's cancer treatment. The American Federal government doesn't either. It will soon be $18 trillion in debt. About a third of the Federal government runs on borrowed money. Government spending in America, Japan, and Europe is unsustainable. Government doesn't have a backstop. There really are no scenarios where debt gets under control. We are all waiting for a crisis to do anything about it.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

As a Canadian, I've never understood why some of my southern neighbors are so against socialized medicare. A healthy workforce is more productive than one that is critically ill and unable to take care of itself (if you want to look at it from economic terms). The same can be said for helping your people become better educated.

To me, the problem lies in the COST of medical service in the U.S.. I had a simple outpatient biopsy done in Canada on a trip home to Canada (no insurance as I'm not a resident) for $75. A few days later down in Hawaii I split the stitches and went to a local private clinic to have a tetanus shot and 3 stitches. $350. The look on my face when told the cost: priceless.

So I'd say, get some controls on the costs. Make the system more efficient. Don't let doctors or hospitals charge $50 for an aspirin, etc etc. Then add user fees for simple doctor visits to avoid the kind of overuse you see here in Japan. Allow for those who can afford it to have insurance for higher-tier treatment if they choose to do so. And yes, make sure that everybody has at least basic care so the people who are out there working every day and growing the economy can do it without worrying about the cost of getting sick or injured.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

sangetsu03Jul. 28, 2014 - 10:10AM JST

I'm still waiting to hear how other countries' health care systems are clearly inferior to America's. I might accept that argument if the average lifespan in the USA was 110, but it's not.

Here in Japan Today there are several stories each year of ambulances running from hospital to hospital with an emergency patient, because these hospitals have reached their quota of patients, and cannot accept another. Many Japanese people die each year because they cannot get timely treatment. A few years ago a pregnant Japanese woman died after being refused admittance by seven hospitals. The year before another pregnant woman died after being refused by twenty hospitals. A 75 year old Japanese man died after 25 hospitals refused him 36 times.

Agree. The system is totally broken. I blame this to Japanese policy makers. They have been neglecting this issues for decades. Now the problems are all turned around and are hunting them.

The response time of ambulance is always monitored here by the city and the state governments in US. If the response time is not improving, then the governments can go and find others who can.

All ambulance technicians are certified by the state government and they all need to fulfill proper training requirements in order to be certified every year.

In America, a hospital may not refuse emergency victims, period.

Spot on. I guess Japanese has a different set of mind.

One of the reasons Japanese people live in the cities is because hospitals and healthcare in rural areas are poor.

Very, very true. You are spot on. It is shame Japan is the 3rd biggest economy in the world, but healthcare is not the best. The doctor even charges you $250 for a death certificate-a piece of paper. BAD.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

For all the problems of the Japanese health care system, it's still more efficient and better run than the American system.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

"No, I am not wealthy. No I do not have enough to pay for someone's cancer treatment. " You are not wealthy. But you imply you have all this money to give away as if medical costs are trivial. Then what should we do for that person who cannot pay for their cancer treatment. We are talking about the Walmart people. Not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid, but not rich enough to purchase healthcare. Caught in the middle. And they really want to try to pay for healthcare. There are too many of those in the USA. Just let them rack up medical debts (they get treatment, anyway)? Is that the correct "citizens choice"? What say you?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

bass: No, it's the country's loss when people like me and the 1% all leave!

heh Why would the Top 1% leave? They are making a killing right now. You said that you yourself are making money hand over fist. In fact, I believe you said that you were doing quite well and your sole purpose for countering Obama was because you cared deeply about others. I still have the coffee stains on my monitor when it flew out of my mouth after reading that.

In fact, weren't you going around saying that because of Obamacare you were going to have to fire some of your workers? I asked you to elaborate and you stopped talking about it. You haven't mentioned it since. With thousands of words written in this thread alone, why hasn't it come up again? Smells fishy.

I have a feeling that you say what you want anytime you want. I don't think you're being honest with us. Your stories often change to fit whatever point you're trying to make. And your idea of adult conversation includes using adjectives like "sainted anointed one."

You are the problem with America in 2014. All talk, no solutions.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

"bass: No, it's the country's loss when people like me and the 1% all leave!" I thought you were already gone in Germany or somewhere as the traveling media executive you are. Speaking of executives, what do your two close CEO friends (of American fortune 500 companies that you talked about in previous posts, yes you claimed to have these friends) think of ObamaCare? Again these are CEOs of companies who employ 10s of thousands and in some cases 100s of thousands of people.? You talk to these two friends of yours regularly. Don't they have anything to say about Obamacare?

Thanks for the horror stories of the Japanese medical system. Now for the American system:

The doctor of Michael Douglas did not detect his throat cancer and his treatment was delayed. Michael Jackson was simply killed by his doctor. The American medical system could not save Steve Jobs. The spouse of a friend of mine had a skin cancer misdiagnosis and ended up dying. A surgeon cut a main artery leading to the legs by accident and the patient ended up having a serious problem (I can't remember if he died or had to have his legs amputated but his life did change or did end). A man was shoved out the hospital door after open heart surgery after only three days to rest and ended up with a staph infection....and on and on and on...

There are too many surgeries in the USA that don't have any benefit:

Heart surgery- there was a study that shows in many cases bypasses have not increased the 5-year survival rate. In fact I know of a heart surgery ring that got busted out for this type of indiscriminate surgery. Knee surgery- the common knee surgery that orthopaedic surgeons like to do is a real scam because the knee usually heals itself with this type of injury with time. Removal of wisdom teeth by surgery - also a scam and has been considered a surgery cartel.

In Japan you are less likely to get redundant surgery. But somehow the life expectancy is higher here. It's even higher in some parts of China of all places. Again, unless the life expectancy in the USA is 110 how can you really criticize other countries' systems.

Someone said the German system is really bad. Can you explain the problem with the German system? Then I will go back and find more American medical nightmare stories.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@nishikat: most American people have this "we are superior" syndrome to the extent they are not able to see how bad their country is...I lost all my hopes when I try to discuss with them.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@alex

I fear you have been brainwashed,

Not at all.

if you don't know the real role that your country plays in many countries' political instability.

Please tell our president that.

Anyway, the US should also change their food culture. Your food is rubbish, no offense. Italian people have healthy food, we are slim and our average lifespan is one of the highest in the world also thanks to this.

Actually, our food is very diverse, so to say and lump all American food monolithically is like saying all humans look exactly alike. If you want to eat junk food, there are lot of choices, if you want vegan or organic, you also have that choice. Not everything in Italy is healthy nor tasty, it's completely subjective. I'm from California, vegan fusion capital of the world and home of the meat hating culture. It just depends. But the way, I've always wondered why in Italy often with their good food, why so many women gain substantially once they pass 40. It's not just about eating right, but nutrition, exercise, getting, genetics are all critical factors.

@global

We evaluate all methods, but we are not focusing too much on the polls from Rasmussen. . The polls are not just a fad, it is all about science.

Ok, I understand and that is true in large part, but remember these scientific polls should be overlooked then regardless of which party is in office, since we should not judge ANY president Republican or Democrat.

@stranger

For all the problems of the Japanese health care system, it's still more efficient and better run than the American system.

That's your opinion, I find the Japanese system to be a huge nightmare and it's definitely NOT without it's flaws, for me and even for my wife who is Japanese, she prefers the American system as do I. It all depends on what you have, treatment, disease etc.

@super

heh Why would the Top 1% leave? They are making a killing right now. You said that you yourself are making money hand over fist. In fact, I believe you said that you were doing quite well and your sole purpose for countering Obama was because you cared deeply about others. I still have the coffee stains on my monitor when it flew out of my mouth after reading that.

Try holding the mug steady. Me caring about people is about people caring about themselves, I believe in self-reliance as it should be, I'll help you fish, but I'm not going to fish for you. Also, that's why I have money, because I wasn't spoiled. Hard work does pay.

In fact, weren't you going around saying that because of Obamacare you were going to have to fire some of your workers? I asked you to elaborate and you stopped talking about it. You haven't mentioned it since. With thousands of words written in this thread alone, why hasn't it come up again? Smells fishy.

Yes, because of Obamacare, had I gotten the coverage it would have me thousands more a year, so I made the decision to downsize and let most of my staff go. They understood and they knew my position and opposition to Obamacare. No hard feelings. I want about to let my business become bankrupt because of this president trying to force me into buying something I think is crap compared to what we used to have when we were under Kaiser.

I have a feeling that you say what you want anytime you want.

As do you.

I don't think you're being honest with us.

I am, but I don't have to divulge ever inch and detail my life to everyone on JT, nothing wrong with that.

Your stories often change to fit whatever point you're trying to make. And your idea of adult conversation includes using adjectives like "sainted anointed one."

No, I'm consistent, it's you liberals that want to twist, contort and change and manipulate a conversation or sentence that best fit with your narrative if you are not satisfied with what you hear. Believe me, I know, I graduated from a mostly liberal arts University, I had to deal with this on a daily basis, nothing new.

You are the problem with America in 2014. All talk, no solutions.

I hear liberals say that constantly and yet,the party with the so called solutions are about to lose the Senate and seats in the House. Why is that, because they are the party of solutions? That's the real problem in 2014

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

So what is the Republican solution to Obamacare? Still waiting on that one.

And the idea that the 1% would leave is a ridiculous concept stolen from Atlas Shrugged - a book as full of itself as any. If the 1% left, they would still need workers to keep them being the 1%.

And when it comes down to it, America would be a much better place with the 1% gone. The money would balance out better, and it would be better for all the people all around. But as someone else already mentioned, why would the 1% ever want to leave?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Not at all.

if you don't know the real role that your country plays in many countries' political instability.

Please tell our president that.

You should ask him that, since apparently you don't know it, and you think the only thing your government does is helping those countries that for "some reason can't keep their people under control".

Actually, our food is very diverse, so to say and lump all American food monolithically is like saying all humans look exactly alike.

The main food culture in the US is junk food. Of course, you have French food, Italian food, Chinese food, etc. like in any other country in the world, and you can choose, but your average diet is so wrong. In Italy we have Mc Donald as well, and everyone can choose whatever he wants to eat, if junk food, Chinese, being vegan, etc., but our ordinary diet, is the Mediterranean die,t and it's very healthy and balanced. In Italy there are some fat people of course, but not as much as in the US, there's a huge difference. And it's a fact we have an average superior lifespan than the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_in_Italy

"Italy is known for its generally very good health, considering the fact that it has the world's 4th highest life expectancy[citation needed], low infant mortality, relatively healthy cuisine and diet, and healthcare system that is ranked 2nd according to WHO (World Health Organization)[1] and which has the third best medical performance worldwide.[2] As with any developed country, Italy has adequate and sufficient water and food distribution, and levels of nutrition and sanitation are high."

Maybe you could learn something from us, uh? Or do you think we are only mafia and mandolino, like in Hollywood movies? Noooo, it's impossible that the greatest superpower in the world can have something that can learn from a minor country like Italy...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"the decision to downsize and let most of my staff go." Why would you do this in Germany? It has nothing to do with ObamaCare?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@stranger

So what is the Republican solution to Obamacare? Still waiting on that one.

The Republicans have a lot of ideas floating around and are willing to discuss them with the president if he would sit his skinny butt down to hear other ideas and solutions to the healthcare debacle. Now does that mean, the Republicans have something concrete, Not necessarily, but there are alternatives to the mess with have now, because the way Obamacare is in it's current form, won't last another 2 years.

And the idea that the 1% would leave is a ridiculous concept stolen from Atlas Shrugged - a book as full of itself as any. If the 1% left, they would still need workers to keep them being the 1%.

That's WHY many of the 1% invest for a rainy day and for the future, that's why, I DO have money and can afford to leave and many do. California is hanging on because of Silicon Valley in the North and the Hollywood film industry in the South, other than that, the rich are fleeing in droves. Go to California and you'll see what liberal policies did to the once 5th largest economy in the world.

And when it comes down to it, America would be a much better place with the 1% gone.

Really? So California the largest and once prosperous MEGA state is turning into one of the largest Gettos in the country. The rich leave, take all the jobs, that's what you get. So if that's your wish, when more and more rich people leave,you will see the US turn into one giant welfare 3rd world country. Remember, I've never seen a poor person offer another poor person a job.

The money would balance out better, and it would be better for all the people all around. But as someone else already mentioned, why would the 1% ever want to leave?

Apparently, you never lived in California, otherwise you'd never ask that question.

@alex

if you don't know the real role that your country plays in many countries' political instability.

Most of Europe can bask in democracy, that's our present and stability for you. You are welcome.

You should ask him that, since apparently you don't know it, and you think the only thing your government does is helping those countries that for "some reason can't keep their people under control".

@alex

I wouldn't know, he's enigmatic and I never voted for him anyway.

The main food culture in the US is junk food. Of course, you have French food, Italian food, Chinese food, etc. like in any other country in the world, and you can choose, but your average diet is so wrong. In Italy we have Mc Donald as well, and everyone can choose whatever he wants to eat, if junk food, Chinese, being vegan, etc., but our ordinary diet, is the Mediterranean die,t and it's very healthy and balanced. In Italy there are some fat people of course, but not as much as in the US, there's a huge difference. And it's a fact we have an average superior lifespan than the US.

As I said, it's all subjective, if you want to believe that, it's your right, but we have the same foods and access to various wholesome and healthy foods and as a Californian, we are the breadbasket of produce fruits and vegetables. Also, as a diverse nation, we have our own original California fusion cuisine, unique, healthy and balanced, please try it sometime and then judge.

As I said, been to Italy, food is ok, not quite my thing, but each to his own, you like your food and I like mine, that's good enough.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

But Mr. Bass, what do your CEO friends say about ObamaCare? Again, you do have CEO friends (2 from US fortune 500 companies):

http://www.japantoday.com/category/world/view/boehner-says-it-is-time-for-u-s-to-deal-with-immigration-reform#comment_1720948

Me: "Are your two friends fortune 500 CEOs? Are they real CEOs?"

You: "YES"

You didn't make this up, did you?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Most of Europe can bask in democracy, that's our present and stability for you. You are welcome.

It's not real democracy, imho. Plus, I never thought Europe is better politically than the US. We are your ally, we do everything you wish that we do, and we share the same crimes all around the world and the same Western supremacist ideology.

I wouldn't know, he's enigmatic and I never voted for him anyway.

Well, American foreign policy is always the same, so no matter which is your president, you should know the reasons why you attacked Iraq or you wanted to attack Siria.

As I said, it's all subjective, if you want to believe that, it's your right, but we have the same foods and access to various wholesome and healthy foods and as a Californian, we are the breadbasket of produce fruits and vegetables. Also, as a diverse nation, we have our own original California fusion cuisine, unique, healthy and balanced, please try it sometime and then judge.

Well tell me why obesity is such a huge problem in the US, if the ordinary diet is that healthy.

As I said, been to Italy, food is ok, not quite my thing, but each to his own, you like your food and I like mine, that's good enough.

It's not matter of taste, it's matter of what is healthy and what isn't. People could dislike natto, but it's very healthy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bass: Yes, because of Obamacare, had I gotten the coverage it would have me thousands more a year, so I made the decision to downsize and let most of my staff go. They understood and they knew my position and opposition to Obamacare. No hard feelings.

You do realize that the employer mandate, at it's earliest, will take effect in 2015, right? And you've already "let most of your staff go?" And you do realize that it only affects businesses of 50 employees or more, so how many people exactly did you let go that would constitute "most" of your staff? Did you go from 150 employees to 49? All because of "thousands of dollars a year?"

And, naturally, there were no hard feelings. The cherry on top, I suppose.

You are completely and utterly fabricating this story.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@alex

Well tell me why obesity is such a huge problem in the US, if the ordinary diet is that healthy.

The problem is not so much the food then it is about the portion content. I am in my 40's, I work out, am very fit and have always eaten healthy. It's like cigarettes, we have them everywhere, but we don't smoke as much as our European counterparts. It's a personal choice. Before the 70's American portions were much, much smaller than today's humongous size and one of the reasons for that is, during the 70's when the US economy was really booming and people had more disposable incomes, many restaurants felt they wanted to give people more food for their since now many people had enough of it. Everything started to get bigger, heavier, greasier. And that's where you started to see an increase in peoples waste line. But that is changing in many areas throughout the country, the last 20 years, there has been an uptick on seeing obese people.

It's not matter of taste, it's matter of what is healthy and what isn't. People could dislike natto, but it's very healthy.

Of course, taste plays a huge part in our choices of wanting to eat certain foods or not. Natto may be good for you, but if the smell repels you, then it's your choice if you want to eat it or not. So if your nose says, NO then you probably won't like if it hits your tongue.

It's not matter of taste, it's matter of what is healthy and what isn't. People could dislike natto, but it's very healthy.

@super

You do realize that the employer mandate, at it's earliest, will take effect in 2015, right? And you've already "let most of your staff go?"

Yes, and the reason for that is because I am preparing to relocate overseas. 2 years ago, I was thinking at first to expand the company in the states, but as I started to crunch the numbers and started to worry about the mandate so I made the decision to cut my staff now and downsize.

And you do realize that it only affects businesses of 50 employees or more, so how many people exactly did you let go that would constitute "most" of your staff? Did you go from 150 employees to 49? All because of "thousands of dollars a year?"

In total I had 54 and now I have 18. This wasn't sudden and at one time, it was gradual.

And, naturally, there were no hard feelings. The cherry on top, I suppose.

No, there were NO hard feeling, because I never treated my staff like crap, EVER!

You are completely and utterly fabricating this story.

No, but I wish I were, it'd be a lot easier.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Maybe the commenters on JAPANTODAY should look at the Universal Healthcare system in JAPAN, and see how well it is for them, because last time I checked, their healthcare system didn't bring them to ruin nor did it make everyone lazy

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Japan is NOT America, what works well for one country might not work in the same manner in another country.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Although this is an interesting topic, I have seen some of the the worst comments here that I have seen in years. I do like the comments that Americans often vote in their disinterest (especially in states like Kentucky, Alabama, Arkansas, Lousiana, etc.)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"In total I had 54 and now I have 18. This wasn't sudden and at one time, it was gradual." bass4funk, how about your 2 CEO friends of American fortune 500 companies whose companies employ up to 100s of thousands of people?

"I checked, their healthcare system didn't bring them to ruin nor did it make everyone lazy" Years later it will be single payer. For one thing Medicaid does the job pretty well. But the main problem is Medicaid patients themselves. They often make poor lifestyle choices that make them unhealthy. Medicaid has also been growing steadily for decades. Republicans have even pushed it forward (Bush 1st and Reagan)

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Well, my wife and I are not among the alleged 10M, simply because every time we've tried to sign up, the website was/is down, not functioning, or the "open sign-up" was/is closed. Not really sold on PPAHCA anyways, as a lot of friends of mine who were switched over by their employers have seen their premiums and deductibles skyrocket and others see their health care insurance "magically" disappear.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Hallelujah!!!! Thank the Lord, Thank you Jesus!!! Healthcare!!!!!

Finally an effort to end the genocide!!!

No more kids dying in hospital emergency rooms. Lets end the heart ache and pain of watching those closest die in pain because someone else wants to line his pockets.

Call it whatever you want!! I'm voting for anybody who upholds it.

You mad? How dare they use our hospitals!!

Show your raw racist nature some more plz so we can avoid you.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Jason, just checked. The website is up. Try it again. None (not even one) of my American friends are/were in the same situation as yours so sorry for all the bad luck. But if what you are saying is true you make a good example of why single payer should exist and not ObamaCare (that the Republicans invented).

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Thanks for the 411, nishikat, but there is still no open enrollment.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@bruinfan I do like the comments that Americans often vote in their disinterest (especially in states like Kentucky, Alabama, Arkansas, Lousiana, etc.)

There are still many Americans who value their freedom to choose for themselves rather than crassly wanting freebies at someone else's expense. This is a fundamental difference between Left and Right. In America both sides of the political spectrum should be able to organize themselves to live they way they choose. However the Left continues to impose their Socialist political ideology on all Americans through government dictate rather than within private organizations of people that support their central control, limited freedom philosophy.

Most Americans continue to dislike Obamacare because it takes away their right to choose for themselves. America needs health care reform that suits all and not just the big government tendencies of one half of the country.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

A mandate is not free. Romney said a mandate is necessary to prevent "free-riders". Don't forget that ObamaCare is just repackaged from what the Republicans invented. The reason why I want a mandate is I want to pay my fair share and not pay for the "free-riders" that Romney talked about. There is no such thing as free healthcare unless you are poor. For heathcare there really is not difference between the Right and Left because the Left want to do what the Right invented.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites