Supreme Court starting to hear health care case
#16
Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case
There seems to be a suggestion here that the health market could regulate itself without political intervention. Nothing could be further from the truth!
#19
Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case
According to this study by the Urban Institute (a non-partisan think tank), only about 7.3 million Americans (or 2%) are not offered any assistance under the PPACA (or do not already have insurance), and would thus face the penalties if they don't obtain coverage.
#20
Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case
According to this study by the Urban Institute (a non-partisan think tank), only about 7.3 million Americans (or 2%) are not offered any assistance under the PPACA (or do not already have insurance), and would thus face the penalties if they don't obtain coverage.
#21
Forum Regular
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 66
Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case
Thankfully in the US we have checks/balances. The Commerce Clause is the most-cited law/precedent in this mandate. The question is - does the government have the right to demand that someone purchase a good/service that another citizen provides. That is, if the government says "you must" purchase something - doesn't that mean it also requires someone to - at the risk of a fine or punishment - dispense with that.
As we saw in oral arguments today, the SCOTUS seems to be properly examining the future ramifications of this law, and it will most likely be struck down (the individual mandate).
Comparisons to car insurance are wrong. You only need to buy car insurance IF you intend to drive you car on public roads. You'll need to purchase insurance IF you're born. Once again, there is no decision post-birth in this case.
As we saw in oral arguments today, the SCOTUS seems to be properly examining the future ramifications of this law, and it will most likely be struck down (the individual mandate).
Comparisons to car insurance are wrong. You only need to buy car insurance IF you intend to drive you car on public roads. You'll need to purchase insurance IF you're born. Once again, there is no decision post-birth in this case.
#22
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,852
Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case
As we saw in oral arguments today, the SCOTUS seems to be properly examining the future ramifications of this law, and it will most likely be struck down (the individual mandate).
Comparisons to car insurance are wrong. You only need to buy car insurance IF you intend to drive you car on public roads. You'll need to purchase insurance IF you're born. Once again, there is no decision post-birth in this case.
Comparisons to car insurance are wrong. You only need to buy car insurance IF you intend to drive you car on public roads. You'll need to purchase insurance IF you're born. Once again, there is no decision post-birth in this case.
#23
Forum Regular
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 66
Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case
No - the choice is whether those emergency rooms decide to cover the patient (which they probably will). However, those free services can easily be written off on their taxes. The increase in costs for health insurance are not due to those emergency room visits (as is often cited). Instead, we like using new, expensive treatments - and we're all living longer.
#25
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,852
Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case
Over $100bn in health services isn't paid for each year. The "free-loader" problem may not be the biggest factor in the US's healthcare access mess, but it's certainly an issue.
#26
Forum Regular
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 66
Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case
I don't care about the costs - that really isn't relevant to the discussion at hand. The question is - does the government have the right to coercively force the purchasing of any good or service from the public market. I think as the court argued today, the answer is most likely going to be "No".
#27
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,852
Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case
I don't care about the costs - that really isn't relevant to the discussion at hand. The question is - does the government have the right to coercively force the purchasing of any good or service from the public market. I think as the court argued today, the answer is most likely going to be "No".
The government is requiring people participating in the healthcare market (i.e. everyone, given that everyone has access to emergency rooms regardless of ability to pay) to take out insurance. Would you prefer a system where people who did not wish to have insurance were required to sign an affidavit that they will be left to die if they could not pay for any emergency room treatment they might require?
#28
Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case
I don't care about the costs - that really isn't relevant to the discussion at hand. The question is - does the government have the right to coercively force the purchasing of any good or service from the public market. I think as the court argued today, the answer is most likely going to be "No".
Maybe they should force us to buy, health care insurance from them. Just came up with a great name, lets call it NHS.
I hear tell it works really well, in all of the first world & beyond.
"Will the Government be able to make us buy Broccoli" (Close enough for Government work ), what a stupid dumb arse thing to say.
Frank R.
#29
Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case
Health care is a right, from pre birth to death. ITS NOT A#$%^&**&^%$ PRIVELIDGE.
If there is a cure, there is a cure for all.
A Mercedes, a mansion & a private Jet plane, they are privileges.
Frank R.
If there is a cure, there is a cure for all.
A Mercedes, a mansion & a private Jet plane, they are privileges.
Frank R.
#30
Account Closed
Joined: Aug 2002
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 38,865
Re: Supreme Court starting to hear health care case
BTW, I disagree with your statement above.
Ian