Obamacare
Do you think the Affordable Care Act is good for the country or not?
Pro-Obamacare
Side Score: 48
|
 |
Anti-Obamacare
Side Score: 46
|
|
|
|
|
2
points
The health care industry needed reform. America's rates were growing at a tremendous rate and it would've been more detrimental in the long run to the American people, if the healthcare issue remained unresolved. The cost of failed healthcare system outweighs the costs of a reformed one. Side: Pro-Obamacare
1
point
1
point
Please try to read the Act. It comforts me as an American to know that my fellow citizens will have access to health insurance, that preconditions will not restrict insurance coverage, and that the misuse of dollars spent on health care expenditures will be addressed. Side: Pro-Obamacare
The affordable health care act is a giant step in the right direction in allowing all citizens regardless of pre existing condition access to health care. along with this it is moving in the direction to provide access to those who cant afford the over inflated cost of insurance providers, i think that eventually people will realize that a single payer system, or even a dual system (like in canada) would be the best way to go in america. while i do not think that the legislation is perfect, it is most definitely a step in the right direction. Side: Pro-Obamacare
Everyone agrees with the pre-existing condition part. Romney's website says: "Prevent discrimination against individuals with pre-existing conditions who maintain continuous coverage". Romney came up with Obamacare. But just because some states do something doesn't mean every state should be forced to do it... Romney also says he wants to "Ensure flexibility to help the uninsured, including public-private partnerships, exchanges, and subsidies". That doesn't mean that we needed a 2,400 page document that no one was allowed to read before they voted on it in the middle of the night... Don't you think there are common sense things that Government could have done, before they totally changed healthcare? Like: End tax discrimination against the individual purchase of insurance Allow consumers to purchase insurance across state lines Unshackle HSAs by allowing funds to be used for insurance premiums Promote "co-insurance" products Promote alternatives to "fee for service" Encourage "Consumer Reports"-type ratings of alternative insurance plans Cap non-economic damages in medical malpractice lawsuits Empower individuals and small businesses to form purchasing pools Prevent discrimination against individuals with pre-existing conditions who maintain continuous coverage Facilitate IT interoperability Offer innovation grants to explore non-litigation alternatives to dispute resolution All of the above ideas are from Romney's website... Elected officials should not pass massive bills that do hundreds of separate things. Elected officials should pass simple bills that do one thing at a time. Elected officials should not pass bills that are longer than 1 page. Elected officials should be capable of at least reading the bills they write. Elected officials did not have enough time to read the 1,400 pages of Obamacare. You should be able to read a bill within an hour, and know if it is a good bill or a bad bill. There is no reason for two thousand four hundred page bills, like Obamacare. Elected officials should have to read and prove they understand the bills they pass, before they are allowed to vote on them. Massive government programs don't typically lower cost. Massive government programs don't typically improved efficiency. Massive government programs don't typically improve the consistency of service? The federal government runs Amtrack and the Postoffice. We should keep them as far away from healthcare as possible. If private hospitals made healthcare policy the way the federal government does (by passing bills in the middle of the night, that are 2,400 pages long, that no one has had a chance to read, debate, or analyze) these hospitals would go out of business. The healthcare industry is already messed up, but shoving self righteous, pompous corrupt congressmen and women in the middle is not going to help. Steve Jobs says that the reason why Apple was successful, is they didn't try to do everything. They "got rid of all the crap". They just tried to do a few things but do it very well. They make 1 phone, 1 tablet, and only a few different laptops, and desktops. Contrast this to Nokia, that has hundreds of different phones. Each bill should just try to do one thing, but do it well. Obamacare does hundreds of seperate things... You can't even talk about Obamacare, because the bill is 2,400 pages long... you can't say if it is good or bad, because maybe 1/2 of it is good and 1/2 of it is crap... But the should have debated each part of it separably.... The best sandwich, is still garbage if 1/2 of it is Crap... We don't have enough money to be making trillion dollar mistakes, like Obamacare... we are at the edge of a cliff... China, India, Brazil, are all standing there to see if we jump off... We can't make more trillion dollar mistakes, and we have to fix each of the 100 billion dollar mistakes that are hidden in Obamacare. Side: Anti-Obamacare
2
points
Healthcare isn't a right. A right is guaranteed by a higher overseeing authority. Generally it is accepted that rights are provided by the government. If healthcare is a right, that means that healthcare is provided by the government. Therefore, you're saying that the government needs to pay for healthcare. The problem is that the government doesn't have any money. The only way they can get money to pay for your right to healthcare is for them to seize that money from its citizens (via taxes), and that is akin to taking the private property of one just to give it to another. The taxpayer trades their labor for their wages. If their wages are being seized by the government via taxation, they are essentially seizing labor. Is that not the same as slavery? When one works involuntarily to provide for another? We need to examine then what happens if healthcare is a guaranteed right. If that is a right, then why would anybody voluntarily pay for it? Whether they pay for it or not, it is guaranteed, so rationality would demand that nobody pay for it anymore. The government would have no choice then but to seize more via taxation, or mandate that healthcare workers provide their services for little or no cost, as people can't be denied their rights. But if healthcare workers are working for little or nothing, where is their incentive? They may just decide that healthcare isn't worth it anymore, and leave the field, increasing costs. Or do you mandate that they continue at their position, and truely make them a slave? Labelling any type of good or service as a right is a very slippery slope. Maybe people should be a little bit more self interested in providing for themselves, as opposed to having it provided for them under the guise of "a right." Side: Anti-Obamacare
All I can say it's worked in the UK for years, what would you rather pay for via your taxes, War or Healthcare. Some people cant afford health care or health insurance how would you feel if someone you loved or you yourself needed medical care but was'nt allowed access because they could'nt afford it? Side: Pro-Obamacare
1
point
Wrong, wrong, wrong. If someone ill enters a hospital without health care, they would be cared for anyway with the expenses passed along to the tax payer. If the person has health care, hence Affordable Care, the Insurance company would pay for the health care. Side: Pro-Obamacare
1
point
I work as a health care provider. Health care costs are spiraling out of control. I see it daily when doctors order expensive tests which will not change their view on how they treat the patients. Doctors have an unlimited ticket to do whatever they want to do. I've seen patients call "VIP" who get every test right away delaying other patients with normal insurance. I've seen frown on patients with minimal insurance coverage. My health insurance goes up every month because of a lack of control in health expenses. Someone must be done to serve all Americans. Obama Care gets my vote! Side: Pro-Obamacare
1
point
I work as a health care provider. Health care costs are spiraling out of control. I see it daily when doctors order expensive tests which will not change their view on how they treat the patients. Doctors have an unlimited ticket to do whatever they want to do. I've seen patients call "VIP" who get every test right away delaying other patients with normal insurance. I've seen frown on patients with minimal insurance coverage. My health insurance goes up every month because of a lack of control in health expenses. Someone must be done to serve all Americans. Obama Care gets my vote! Side: Pro-Obamacare
1
point
1
point
|
0
points
-2
points
We should restore state leadership in Healthcare reform Reasons to agree: 1. States will have an incentive to be frugal with the money they use on healthcare. People in Texas don't mind spending stupid money on stuff, as long as they know people in California and California are paying for it (and visa-versa). 2. States are better at experimenting with solutions to healthcare. 3. When states are able to experiment with solutions to healthcare, they are able to learn from each other, and do what works, and avoid what doesn't work. 4. Because states are different, they shouldn't all have a one size fits all healthcare program. 5. The federal government can not be expected to always make the right choice with regard to healthcare, but if they are the ones running the show, no one will know when they made the wrong choice, because you won't have other states to compare the results with. When one state makes the wrong choice, and another state makes the right choice, you are more likely to be able to observe correctly, and fix the problems in the future. 6. The Affordable Care Act gives government too much power 7. Obamacare is too complex. 8. Obamacare is too expensive 9. The federal government should let states handle welfare programs. 10. The federal government should limit itself to small bills that take one issue at at time, and solve the issues in straightforward clear ways, only after a consensus has been made, and experiments have been conducted in the states. Big expensive, important bills should not be passed in the middle of the night before anyone has a chance to read them. 11. If someone promises to have C-Span debates before they pass a bill, and they break that promise, the next elected official should repeal the bill, and go forward in the way that the original elected official originally promised. 12. Obamacare doesn't reduce costs, it just shifts them through a bureaucracy. 13. Letting states have leadership in healthcare prevents the federal government from becoming too powerful. Side: Anti-Obamacare
1
point
Thank you for your reasons, but many of them are redundant; that is say the same thing that Obama care (The Affordable Care Act) is too expensive. Do you realize that this act will decrease the exploding cost of health care over the next decade. Do you realize that now MDs are getting richer, and exploding how much is spent on health care thus raising the health care insurance for everything. More substance in your argument is needed. Side: Pro-Obamacare
In the US, the sovereignty is with the individual, not with the state. This means that each individual is to decide what they want for their own lives. This includes healthcare, which is not explicitly granted to the federal government by the constitution. It is unconstitutional. But it is not the USA anymore. is it the USSA: The United Socialist States of America. Under the USA, it is unconstitutional. Under the USSA, It is constitutional. Side: Anti-Obamacare
1
point
Very weak argument. You do not address that fact that health care is rising drastically each year. You do not address the misuse of health care by physicians and pharmaceutical agencies. You also do not address denial of health care due to pre conditions, or to the many people who don't have health care. You also do not have a degree in constitutional law! Side: Pro-Obamacare
The Affordable Care Act gives government too much power The federal government should not do big multi-trillion dollar experiments with medicine. The states should be the laboratory of experiment. The federal government should only enact policy that has already proven effective in other locations. Obamacare added a trillion dollars in new health care spending. Obamacare raised taxes by $500 billion. Obamacare slashed $500 billion from medicare. Any bill that is 2400 pages long gives the government too much power. The federal government should not force people to buy health insurance. The affordable care act has too much regulation. The affordable care act has too many fees. The affordable care act has too many subsidies. The affordable care act has too many excise taxes. The affordable care act has too many exchanges, The affordable care act has too many rule-setting boards. Pro big government people always think that other big governments fail because their bureaucrats were not as smart as ours. They think they are smart enough to see what needs to be done. They think they are smarter than everyone else. The free market lets everyone set their own costs, and adjust them according to supply and demand. The free market encourages everyone to increase their efficiency, so they can compete. The rule setting boards from Obamacare are motivated by the same things that kill all bureaucratic top heavy organizations, and will result in America being the worst possible combination of a public and private healthcare industry, resulting in the same people who funded Solyndra running our healthcare industry. Side: Anti-Obamacare
1
point
Aren't all bills verbose? Would you rather sleep well knowing that not everyone like possible yourself doesn't have health care? What would your propose to limit the ever increasing cost of health care each? Do you have a plan? Did any of the previous presidents have a plan? Is it not better to start with something that can be modified, rather than give in--as you seem to be doing--and allow increasing health care to take advantage of future American generations? Side: Pro-Obamacare
Obamacare doesn't reduce costs, it just shifts them through a bureaucracy. If someone promises to have C-Span debates before they pass a bill, and they break that promise, the next elected official should repeal the bill, and go forward in the way that the original elected official originally promised. @Romney should replace #Obamacare using #CSpan debates. The fact that Obama gave wavers democratic states and liberal businesses don't have to comply with Obamacare prove that it is bad. The federal government should limit itself to small bills that take one issue at at time, and solve the issues in straightforward clear ways, only after a consensus has been made, and experiments have been conducted in the states. Big expensive, important bills should not be passed in the middle of the night before anyone has a chance to read them. Side: Anti-Obamacare
1
point
Health care expense increases each year dramatically. It has been this way through many of the previous presidents. Finally a President has taken control of it. The initial Affordable Care Act can be modified in the future, but at least it makes sure that each American citizen can get health care, and put a looking glass on the misuse of funds by Doctors. Side: Pro-Obamacare
Are you like some sort of cheerleader for Obamacare or something? It's so great when every citizen gets to pay for expensive healthcare whether they want to or not. Give me a break. You must not be too involved in the health care industry or you'd understand what in the hell Obamacare really is. Side: Anti-Obamacare
0
points
I'm not going to go into whether or not health care is or should be a right, the question is if OBAMACARE is good for the country and it is NOT. It boils down to this, we cant pay for it this way, it wont work! It will collapse by the time my children need it if not before. People seem to think that money doesn't matter when it come to some things but the reality is money is involved in everything, everywhere and it always has been (in one form or another, trading a chicken for a pencil is the same thing as trading paper for a chicken) and always will be. There will always be money directly tied to healthcare (along with everything els) and this country cant pay the obamacare bill! There has to be another way! Side: Anti-Obamacare
It makes no sense to give Government the power to control our health care concidering everything else they try to control has failed. Post office, bankrupt. AMtrak losing tons of money. Social security, broke. The war on drugs, not working and costing billions. The list can go on. The truth is the Medicare act and countless other regulations have drivin up the cost of health care, so in reality what people are saying is, "the Gov made health care unaffordable, hey I know let's give the Gov more control of health care, that will help!" Sadly it will not and givin their track record of sub par services like the VA hospitals, which are not great, they will mess this up too and cost all American people more money at the price of more of our freedom. Side: Anti-Obamacare
0
points
Your argument is completely wrong when you say that people say "the Gov made health care unaffordable...) Wrong! What has made health care unaffordable are the lack of restrictions on the useless tests, and procedures that doctors order that are not controlled. Doctors are getting rich. Health care costs explode. The consumer pays a much higher rate for health care. I am a health care provider, and I see this every day. Obama is the FIRST government official who stepped in to, not only control the misuse of reckless medical spending, but to make sure that everyone has access. Side: Pro-Obamacare
1
point
|
