Appeals court rules ObamaCare unconstitutional...

[FLAVALK]

....or at least the part requiring us to purchase health insurance.

Surprise, surprise!

http://news.yahoo.com/appeals-court-rules-against-obama-healthcare-law-171829777.html

What a lot of clowns

[Jess from VA]

Outstanding.... nice to get some good news once or twice a year.   

[The Anvil]

That's fine, as long as people who can't afford health care and opt out of buying insurance are allowed to die rather than soaking up money for a service they claim to not want then it's all good.

But something tells me they'll take the handout when sickness comes-a callin'.

[Chrisj CMA]

Too bad they cant  re-word their ruling.  It should just say they found Obama to be unconstitutional

[Serk]

All the more reason to celebrate this sudden outbreak of common sense, one of the 2 judges that ruled in favor of overturning at least this one part of Obamacare is a Democrat, a Clinton appointee...

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61218.html

The 2-1 ruling marks the first time a judge appointed by a Democrat has voted to strike down the mandate. Judge Frank Hull, who was nominated by former President Bill Clinton, joined Chief Judge Joel Dubina, who was appointed by George H.W. Bush, to strike down the mandate.

[The Anvil]

Is this a victory or a Trojan Horse leading back toward a single payer option?

The plot thickens...

[Chattanooga Mark]

The current regine thinks it's fine for the government to force its citizens to purchase a product, in this case insurance. Can they also force us to purchase a handgun, a bible or a Quran? After all, there are those who would say each of those items could be considered 'for the public good.'

Just Asking,

Mark

[The Anvil]

The current regine thinks it's fine for the government to force its citizens to purchase a product, in this case insurance. Can they also force us to purchase a handgun, a bible or a Quran? After all, there are those who would say each of those items could be considered 'for the public good.'

Just Asking,

Mark

Fair question.

But here's the issue; almost everyone eventually gets sick and requires medical care. As it stands now it's prohibitively expensive for many people. That's a fact.

So answer this honestly; what if you find yourself out of work and/or otherwise without access to affordable medical care what would you do? Would you slip quietly into the night? And I'm not talking about when you're old and ready to die. Another fact; people talk a good game when they're healthy and things are going well. Uh-oh, got cancer? You'll find people suddenly do an about face when presented with their own mortality.

Because the way it works now people who can't afford it get it anyway and just pass the cost on to people who can (sound familiar?) and that's hardly a conservative value, now is it?

So I've got an idea; an identifier that goes on your driver's license for people who don't want to buy the insurance!

BUT... if you can't pay for your care up front then you are allowed to die or suffer. Nobody has to feel guilty because you made the choice yourself.

I predict that it will be the single least taken advantage of tax break in the history of the universe. It will be less popular than crocodile blowjobs.

[The Anvil]

Oh and here's another thing; all I hear about this is bitching. I hear no workable solutions for a health care system that's broken. Bush II had eight years to address it but he was too busy listening to Jesus tell him to start wars. This is what happens when you elect a slow adult who can't prioritize. Someone else will come along later and "fix" the problem but it might not be to your liking. Tough crap. Eat it and learn from it.

And while we're at it let's make sure we call it what it is; nationalized Romneycare.

[Sodbuster]

.... what if you find yourself out of work and/or otherwise without access to affordable medical care what would you do?

yup .... that would be me. Out of work after 27 years on the job. What did I end up doing for insurance ??  Ain't got none - It was either the insurance or the mortgage payment.

[John Schmidt]

An observation re. those without coverage. First, some info on my wife's situation; she has a form of blood disorder that requires her to take a chemo pill the rest of her life, has been on it for about six yrs. now. She has to visit her cancer dr. at least once every two-three months without fail or it can turn to full blown leukemia almost overnight if not monitored. Secondly....she has Parkinson's disease(about 10 yrs. now) which also requires a visit to the neurologist every 2-3 months. Without my insurance, she would not have that care so vital to her welfare.

Now here's the kicker; my Medicare and supplemental pay for all of it except for a small copay for the meds. You can imagine how expensive they are, and I'm so thankful I have the coverage we do, albeit quite expensive. But, and it's a huge BUT....I know for a fact from personal observation and talking to the various drs., if we didn't have that coverage she would still get the same treatment. The only difference is she would have to get it through an ER or similar facility. But she would get it, for little or no cost to her/us.

With my Medicare deduction of approx. $100/month(which is going up to $247 in 2014) from my SS check, and approx. $550/month deduction from my State retirement check, you can see I'm paying a princely sum for all this care. When obama says his abortion of a bill will cause the cost of care to come down, I simply don't believe it. Mainly because my State deduction is scheduled to go up a minimum of 15% each yr. for the forseeable future and the Medicare premium will more than double in less than three years. Our drs. have all advised us to get any prosthetic operations ASAP(my wife is looking at knee replacement also), and if I so desire I should make application for an electric scooter for her....but do it soon. Why? They have all told me that within the next three yrs.(or less) much of that will be rationed for the elderly, depending on the person's general health compared to their age. All the drs. we deal with, without exception, have been notified of such plans and most are advising their patients as we have been.

Oh yes....it's a great system alright. And that lamebrain pelosi had the gall to stand up there recently and say the so-called "Super Committee" they're now appointing should be required to have everything out in the open. I guess it's "do as I say, not do as I do."

As a final note, I had a recent ER visit when I smashed my thumb. At that time there were 23 patients(not including myself) in the waiting room, many accompanied by numerous family members...but the patient count was 23.(got it from the receptionist) Of that 23, three had insurance....plus myself. The other 20 were treated as I was....but at no cost to them. Maybe I should cancel all my insurance and also live off the gov't., I could certainly use that extra $650/mo. somewhere else. And in less than three years the way things are going it's going to approach $900/month for less coverage. I can't wait for that to kick in. 

[musclehead]

Is this a victory or a Trojan Horse leading back toward a single payer option?

The plot thickens...

it's unconstitutional sorry, whats next? a mandate that everyone must buy a chevy volt?

if they can make you buy one thing they can make you buy anything

[FLAVALK]

Oh and here's another thing; all I hear about this is bitching. I hear no workable solutions for a health care system that's broken. Bush II had eight years to address it but he was too busy listening to Jesus tell him to start wars. This is what happens when you elect a slow adult who can't prioritize. Someone else will come along later and "fix" the problem but it might not be to your liking. Tough crap. Eat it and learn from it.

And while we're at it let's make sure we call it what it is; nationalized Romneycare.

A good start would be Tort reform. But OMG! the lawyers would never let that happen....and most of the clowns in DC are lawyers. So.......

[musclehead]

The current regine thinks it's fine for the government to force its citizens to purchase a product, in this case insurance. Can they also force us to purchase a handgun, a bible or a Quran? After all, there are those who would say each of those items could be considered 'for the public good.'

Just Asking,

Mark

Fair question.

But here's the issue; almost everyone eventually gets sick and requires medical care. As it stands now it's prohibitively expensive for many people. That's a fact.

So answer this honestly; what if you find yourself out of work and/or otherwise without access to affordable medical care what would you do? Would you slip quietly into the night? And I'm not talking about when you're old and ready to die. Another fact; people talk a good game when they're healthy and things are going well. Uh-oh, got cancer? You'll find people suddenly do an about face when presented with their own mortality.

Because the way it works now people who can't afford it get it anyway and just pass the cost on to people who can (sound familiar?) and that's hardly a conservative value, now is it?

So I've got an idea; an identifier that goes on your driver's license for people who don't want to buy the insurance!

BUT... if you can't pay for your care up front then you are allowed to die or suffer. Nobody has to feel guilty because you made the choice yourself.

I predict that it will be the single least taken advantage of tax break in the history of the universe. It will be less popular than crocodile blowjobs.

fair enough, there are other ways to go about this to insure the few that don't have it.

seriously, this has little to do with insuring a few that aren't covered, this has everything to do with power. 'as the secretary shall determine' sound familiar, it would if you read the law.

buckle up for rationing and other more 'draconian' measures

[musclehead]

Oh and here's another thing; all I hear about this is bitching. I hear no workable solutions for a health care system that's broken. Bush II had eight years to address it but he was too busy listening to Jesus tell him to start wars. This is what happens when you elect a slow adult who can't prioritize. Someone else will come along later and "fix" the problem but it might not be to your liking. Tough crap. Eat it and learn from it.

And while we're at it let's make sure we call it what it is; nationalized Romneycare.

yoohoo, over here  when I hear sniveling I'll put this up

[musclehead]

Oh and here's another thing; all I hear about this is bitching. I hear no workable solutions for a health care system that's broken. Bush II had eight years to address it but he was too busy listening to Jesus tell him to start wars. This is what happens when you elect a slow adult who can't prioritize. Someone else will come along later and "fix" the problem but it might not be to your liking. Tough crap. Eat it and learn from it.

And while we're at it let's make sure we call it what it is; nationalized Romneycare.

A good start would be Tort reform. But OMG! the lawyers would never let that happen....and most of the clowns in DC are lawyers. So.......

and portability, buying insurance across state lines. in NY your insurance MUST include massage therapy and other gunk that will increase costs. 

[FLAVALK]

Bush II had eight years to address it but he was too busy listening to Jesus tell him to start wars. This is what happens when you elect a slow adult who can't prioritize. Someone else will come along later and "fix" the problem but it might not be to your liking. Tough crap. Eat it and learn from it.

Every time I think you might have a little something on the ball, you make a sophomoric statement like that. What a clown

[RoadKill]

Oh and here's another thing; all I hear about this is bitching. I hear no workable solutions for a health care system that's broken. Bush II had eight years to address it but he was too busy listening to Jesus tell him to start wars. This is what happens when you elect a slow adult who can't prioritize. Someone else will come along later and "fix" the problem but it might not be to your liking. Tough crap. Eat it and learn from it.

And while we're at it let's make sure we call it what it is; nationalized Romneycare.

Try some of that 'Sommers Eve' stuff and then we'll try to get you something for that 'bleeding heart' ITCH  !    

[Skinhead]

NO ONE has a right to free health care.  There is no such thing.  What we need is to get the insurance companies OUT OF THE HEALTH CARE business.  Exactly what do they do to improve health care?  Nothing!  All they do is add cost.  We need JOBS for people so they can afford health care.  We need TORT reform, so malpractice insurance isn't driving up the costs.  And we need to get people that can work, working, and not just getting an endless hand out.

Oh and here's another thing; all I hear about this is bitching. I hear no workable solutions for a health care system that's broken. Bush II had eight years to address it but he was too busy listening to Jesus tell him to start wars. This is what happens when you elect a slow adult who can't prioritize. Someone else will come along later and "fix" the problem but it might not be to your liking. Tough crap. Eat it and learn from it.

And while we're at it let's make sure we call it what it is; nationalized Romneycare.

Try some of that 'Sommers Eve' stuff and then we'll try to get you something for that 'bleeding heart' ITCH  !     

I agree, it sounds like Advil woke up with a little sand in his mangina.

[The Anvil]

Now here's the kicker; my Medicare and supplemental pay for all of it except for a small copay for the meds. You can imagine how expensive they are, and I'm so thankful I have the coverage we do, albeit quite expensive. But, and it's a huge BUT....I know for a fact from personal observation and talking to the various drs., if we didn't have that coverage she would still get the same treatment. The only difference is she would have to get it through an ER or similar facility. But she would get it, for little or no cost to her/us.

But it would be paid for by someone. Just not you. That's why a Tylenol costs 30 bucks in an ER.

And still, no one's answered my question. But I expected that.

I'm on board with tort reform BTW, but it's not the only thing driving up cost. Nor am I advocating "free" health care. That's the whole point of buying insurance. It's the people who refuse to buy it that should not get it unless they can pay for it up front.

[The Anvil]

Bush II had eight years to address it but he was too busy listening to Jesus tell him to start wars. This is what happens when you elect a slow adult who can't prioritize. Someone else will come along later and "fix" the problem but it might not be to your liking. Tough crap. Eat it and learn from it.

Every time I think you might have a little something on the ball, you make a sophomoric statement like that. What a clown

Point out what exactly is incorrect in what I said.