Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Individual Mandate Thrown Out By Judge


Perchoutofwater
 Share

Recommended Posts

Why don't we do this: You keep posting which one you think it is and I'll let you know if you're hot, warm or cold. This way, you get to do a little research without me giving you the answer straight up. All you need to do is give me the Article - I'll fill in the section and the clause when you get it right!

 

I'll give you a hint: It's somewhere between 1 and 7. Sound good? TIA.

I'm not sure your answer was particularly helpful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it depends. Based on most marketing theories the "early adopters" (all those people who bought a plasma when the 25" was $1K) benefit the earliest, getting the most utility out of their dollars. Now, on a TV this doesn't make much sense. On a lifesaving procedure? What's that worth man? I used to have a boss that had a sign in his office that said "Good, Fast or Cheap - you can pick any 2" That really is the way things work, isn't it. If you want the best, and you want it first/quickly, then be ready to pay for it.

 

Apologies to weigie if I've gotten the marketing cycle out of whack, it's been a long-ass time back to Mkt101 and 102 man.

 

That sounds like Bush:

"the french don't have a word for entrepreneur"

We do have private industry here you know.... :wacko: Sanofi is the 6th largest pharmaceutical company in the world with revenues of 41 billiion (compared to 60 billion for Jhonson and jhonson)

 

I get your point though. Without knowing that much about economics, doesn't your point

1) imply that the US ciitizenry is being overcharged by US spam, if the rest of the world is getting the same technology/knowledge/product at a much lesser price?

2) If your point is true (which I honestly don't know) how is that my problem or my fault when I go see my great french GP here who costs me 22Euros, of which I get 17 back from my state health insurance. My state insurance costs me 2400E a year. I am free to get additional coverage to get close to a 100% reimbursement...

 

ETA. Testing. testing. Did the huddle filter just cahnge p h a r m a to spam?

spam

 

EETA. Yes it did.

P h a r m a is filtered at thehuddle?

How are we lefties going to be able to whine about capitalism if you guys are going to take our cherished boogiemen away?

I think that to be fair and balanced the word 'unemplyed' should also be banished so that the right would have less to beatch about....

just a thought :tup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like Cliaz and perch said, there are soooo many better ways to do this than what's been done.

But Hillary tried something and a lack of cooperation helped it fail. Obama took a lot of the ideas from the right that were used to counter her that plan with this new plan, its being fought. I know there might be a lot of ways to do it - but you wouldn't think so when only two people have tried and they both had to fight tooth and nail to try to get something passed. How come these 'better' ways to run the health care system haven't been rolled out by anybody?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely, Perch and some of the other righties here will be calling for this activist judges head...right? :wacko:

 

 

They were against judicial activism before they were for it. :tup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are so many different ways to provide universal health care without violating the Constitution. I'm surprised that we went down this road to begin with instead of taking the time to develop a system. I feel that Obama and Congress rushed through health care reform to throw something out there to say, "See, we've doing it" instead of working on a better system to put in place.

 

 

I think you're ignoring the politics of the situation....it's pretty apparent to me that the current US healthcare system is flawed. Fatally so, it's going to collapse under its own weight at some point.

 

But there wasn't really an honest debate on the best way to proceed - you can't have a nuanced discussion on the various forms of national health coverage (running the gamut from complete gov't takeover to the crap they passed) when one side can't move beyond the "SOCIALISM!" and "DEATH PANELS!" rhetoric.

 

My family appears to believe what Rush Limbaugh tells them; I heard them grousing that Obama/the Dems were "ramming it down our throats" - which I kinda felt was, if not the opposite, pretty far removed from the actual situation of the debate being derailed by simple-minded rhetoric and the legislation being completely de-balled in an effort to get bipartisan support.

 

The program is what it had to be to get passed. Unfortunately, that bears little resemblance to what actually SHOULD have gotten passed*; and the reason is that at least one side of the discussion was being utterly intellectually dishonest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information