1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Two Years On: Obamacare

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Zeke12, Mar 23, 2012.

  1. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

    It already is. If you are using government food programs, paid for by all of us taxpayers, they subsidize the basics -- bread, milk, eggs, cheese, vegetables, etc. Twinkies, for instance, are not subsidized.

    And we are all already paying for this service, even if we don't use it, because it goes to the common good to make sure that families can put food on the table.

    This bill makes us all purchase health care from private entities, as opposed to the government, yes. But I'm sure you don't want the government to run the health care industry, so this forces us to pay for a service we are ALL using, or are going to use, and in doing so, it makes it more affordable for ALL of us.
     
  2. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    I can't think of too many industries that wouldn't trade being regulated in exchange for a national mandate that every single American be their customer.

    Yeah, really stuck it to them, there.
     
  3. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    So for this the Supreme Court should rule in favor and not worry about constitutionality?
     
  4. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    You can't say it is forcing people to do something, and then put a big fat "If" in front of what it's doing. The conditional statement proves that it's not a mandate.

    The government can set whatever barriers it wants for entry into a government program, be it Medicare, driving on public roads, or accepting public food aid.
     
  5. Zeke12

    Zeke12 Guest

    Yes.

    If the Supreme Court follows case law, it's a slam dunk.

    If not, the above applies.
     
  6. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    You should be less sure of things that you don't know.

    I very much want the government to run the health-care industry.
     
  7. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    *eyeroll*
     
  8. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

    Except that you are mandated to PAY for it, whether you use it or not. The health care bill mandates that you pay for something that you WILL use.
     
  9. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

    My mistake, Rick. If you want the government to take over the health care industry, that's certainly a valid stance, though it had not been brought into this particular discussion. My apologies.
     
  10. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    So then California isn't forcing everyone to buy homeowners insurance, correct?
     
  11. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    Doesn't wash.

    Not everyone will incur the sorts of catastrophic costs that insurance is necessary for.

    Most people would be capable of paying for every cent of the health care they ever use, out of pocket, with the money they would be paying on premiums. If they didn't, the entire insurance industry would collapse with or without this bill.
     
  12. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    Next up mandated law that everyone over the age of 21 must own a home
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page