Obviously, you can't be 100% against "it takes a village," right? You're not completely against taxes being used for the betterment of society, right?

 

Dang close my friend; dang close.

Dang close my friend; dang close.

 

Including taxes that go to Ft Thomas Schools?

 

Ft Thomas roads?

Much like C_W_B shouldn't presume how you will vote, you shouldn't presume that my opposition to ObamaCare is based on being self centered and selfish. Fair enough?

 

There are legitimate philosophical differences here. I'm not a "it takes a village" kind of person. I don't believe that the govt should be able to force me, by the taking of my property, to help my fellow man. If I decide to do it, it should be via my own free will. I don't believe that govt entitlements over the long run are good for the down trodden, but believe they actually hurt the down troddenover the long run. I believe that the more the govt takes care of people, the less important the importance of personal responsibility and the institutions of family and church become. I believe that there is growing segment of Americans that have either become dependent on govt entitlements or are simply willing to get by on govt entitlements and have little desire to work.

 

That is why I am opposed to ObamaCare and other govt entitlement programs. I don't think that is being selfish or self-centered, but if you do, so be it.

Did I say that leatherneck was self centered and selfish . The "lady" doth protest too much , methinks .

Did I say that leatherneck was self centered and selfish . The "lady" doth protest too much , methinks .

 

To quote you, "I am not selfish and self centered like the people that are against this bill". Leatherneck said, "I am opposed to ObamaCare". You called Leatherneck (an myself) self centered, yes.

To quote you, "I am not selfish and self centered like the people that are against this bill". Leatherneck said, "I am opposed to ObamaCare". You called Leatherneck (an myself) self centered, yes.

Then If you say so I guess its true

Obama didn't lie . He didn't think it was a tax . Only a majority on the Supreme court does , and it only affects someone if they don't get some form of health insurance so basically it will be a self imposed "tax" on those who don't .

He knew, he's not stupid. He and his party misrepresented it.

 

You can use Hyperbole with the best of them can't you .

Hyperbole - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I know what hyperbole is, it's exactly what was used by him and the Dems to pass this worthless excuse of "reform".

 

How So . We as a family have health insurance that we are paying for . how will I have to pay the Penalty ?

I see you've fallen for Obama's hyperbole on the subject.

If this helps one person get health care that doesn't have it now I am willing to pay the seemingly minimal taxes that I will have to pay to accomplish that . I am not selfish and self centered like the people that are against this bill

:lol: We're self centered and selfish because we don't agree that Obamacare is the reform that's needed? Wow.

This was the compromise. We're stuck with it for the time being.

 

Can someone more familiar with the subject tell me what the Republican plan for health care reform is following the repeal of the ACA?

This was the compromise. We're stuck with it for the time being.

 

Can someone more familiar with the subject tell me what the Republican plan for health care reform is following the repeal of the ACA?

 

I can't. I haven't seen anything released.

I can't. I haven't seen anything released.

 

I know that even the Republican plan had provisions for getting coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. That's priority No. 1 as far as I'm concerned. I know a guy who was denied coverage through his employer because he made the mistake of telling the insurance company that he'd taken medicine for acid reflux.

 

I'm sure any Republican plan also includes tort reform.

 

But beyond that, I just don't know.

Two items that fall out of ruling not really discussed.

 

1. Medicaid expansion. It is almost if not as critical as the 'individual mandate' to the dollars. It is now 'optional' for states. State can opt out. If a state opts out - then there is no 'universal HC' in that state as there would be no safety net or insurer of last resort.

 

2. Funding via 'taxes'. I have seen where it is not possible for government to arbitrary wave taxes. So the 'waivers' that are being handed out may be in jeopardy.

Bottom line for me is this...

 

I am glad the court supported Obamacare because I see it as progress. Yes, there are problems. But we finally have a framework in place that covers the items every person should be in favor of - as close to no free lunch (care for those without coverage) as we have ever been and no honest hard working American's family is ruined financially because of a health issue. Now we work out the problems as they arise just like we would with any plan that was put in place.

 

I don't think this will be a "trap" for Obama because 90% of the people in this country wanted health care reform. I believe it was one of the main reasons he was elected in the first place. I know many Republicans who are ok with Obamacare because of the same reasons I listed above. The people who will vote against Obama because of his health care reform would have voted against him anyway. My guess is Obamacare won him more Republican votes than it cost him.

This was the compromise. We're stuck with it for the time being.

 

Can someone more familiar with the subject tell me what the Republican plan for health care reform is following the repeal of the ACA?

 

None that I have seen, which is a huge (and typical) mistake IMO.

So far all I've heard is "repeal and replace". But I haven't heard "replace with what" with any degree of specificity.

So far all I've heard is "repeal and replace". But I haven't heard "replace with what" with any degree of specificity.

Maybe our two Senators can get specific on this subject .