Forum Thread

Getting Health Insurance With New Obamacare Exchanges

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 211 - 224 of 224 Prev 1 .. 11 12 13 14 15
  • Democrat
    Philadelphia, PA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote: I'm not entirely sure you do understand how our system of government works. Your hypocrisy when it comes to having no problem with the taxpayer footing the bill on things you consider important but get up in arms about things you don't like exposes this in full light. Who are you to decide what is and isn't a vital health interest for a female? It's not any of your business what they do with their bodies and you should have absolutely zero say when it comes to that.
    So now you want to argue what I think about what women do to their bodies, never said that , only mentioned that there are similar conditions existing in women as in men that prevents them from enjoying their partners sexually and is treated as a medical condition, so what's with the rant about a woman's body , is that what this thread is now about? And again I will question your use of the word hypocrisy as being valid.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    johnnycee Wrote: So now you want to argue what I think about what women do to their bodies, never said that , only mentioned that there are similar conditions existing in women as in men that prevents them from enjoying their partners sexually and is treated as a medical condition, so what's with the rant about a woman's body , is that what this thread is now about? And again I will question your use of the word hypocrisy as being valid.
    I'm just going with the flow of the argument and using your own words to show your double standard when it comes to the taxpayer paying for things that you as a senior citizen want but get angry about the taxpayer paying for things that you as a senior citizen no longer need. You are no doctor and aren't necessarily qualified to say what is and isn't medically imperative for a female.

    I also said that I'm glad the vast majority of men in my generation believe that women have a right to do with their bodies as they wish and shouldn't be discriminated against because they are women. They have the right to affordable and easily accessible contraceptive care just as much as old people have the right to affordable and easily accessible medicines to ensure they can keep having sex. I don't fall into either of these categories and I still have no problem paying for both.
  • Democrat
    Philadelphia, PA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    You certainly love defending your focused approach to subjects especially when someone has an opposing view, you assume certain things about me, which you can't know, I mention similar medical conditions between men and women and you perceived that as some sort of an attack on all women, why? Again you are a subscriber to the theory of the greater good being beneficial to all, when in fact it isn't, you then try to individualize it as if that makes it more wrong. The only double standard being employed here is yours.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    johnnycee Wrote: You certainly love defending your focused approach to subjects especially when someone has an opposing view,
    That is the entire point of a debate. Both sides put their viewpoints forward. I'm sorry that I used your own words in my multiple replies to you in my attempt to show how I believe your points of view are off base.

    My goal in teaching people about the Affordable Care Act is to fight tooth and nail against people like you. I'm fighting people who want to keep the status quo. I'm fighting people who think that it's justifiable to charge women more than men for healthcare. I'm fighting people who think that they should be able to opt out of paying for something because they won't ever use it but have no problem with other people picking up the bill for procedures that they need for themselves. I'm fighting to never go back to the days where an insurance company can discriminate based on gender, preexisting condition, family history, mental history, and any other reason a private company can come up with to deny someone care so they can have as big of a profit as they can get while millions go bankrupt and die. And I will not stop fighting until it becomes generally accepted in this nation that healthcare is a fundamental human right for everyone and not just old people over the age of 65.

    You have every right to disagree with me. I have never suggested that you don't and encourage you to debate me with the same gusto that I approach my debate with you.

    johnnycee Wrote: you assume certain things about me, which you can't know, I mention similar medical conditions between men and women and you perceived that as some sort of an attack on all women, why?
    I only assume what I gathered from our various discussions. From those, I have formed my opinions about you. Nothing more and nothing less.

    johnnycee Wrote: Again you are a subscriber to the theory of the greater good being beneficial to all, when in fact it isn't, you then try to individualize it as if that makes it more wrong. The only double standard being employed here is yours.
    Our debate over the past couple of days can be summarized as such--

    You are "not a strong proponent of paying for someone else's problems" and that "darn near every city has a free clinic set up" for the poor to receive care. You insinuated that these poor people are receiving care from generous donors who want to help poor people. I, in turn, gave you detailed information on where the money for these "free" clinics comes from. You were proven incorrect after saying the taxpayers were "not mandated" to pay for these clinics when I provided you a quick lesson of how the Federal Budget is allocated.

    You didn't respond to any of those numbers and then switched the conversation to asking me if I knew anything about the recent numbers from New York City and Missouri regarding those states abortion versus live birth rate. You encouraged me to "google Birth statistic/abortion New York City" and I did what you asked. I quickly realized the numbers didn't seem to tell the full story, especially since the majority of results were from rather elementary and politically skewed sources. Instead of just reading those "news" stories, I actually read through the entire 14 page study. I then provided a detailed rebuttal and explained why I felt that the numbers you were quoting didn't come close to telling the full story. You didn't bother responding to any of that rebuttal and changed the subject again.

    I readily admit that I am a subscriber to the concept of the greater good being beneficial to all for *certain* things, healthcare and education being my top two. Your sweeping generalization that I feel that way for everything is unfortunate and not based off of anything I have ever said. You say it is a proven fact that the greater good theory of healthcare does not work. If that is the case, then why do we rank so low in the world when it comes to a myriad of healthcare woes? The US ranks 37 in the world with access to affordable healthcare and in the bottom of all industrialized nations in nearly every other category. You know what countries are at the top? The ones who believe in the greater good being beneficial to all. That is a fact that I'm sure you will have a difficult time accepting, but it is a fact indeed.
  • Liberal
    Independent
    Durham, NH
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I concur with you 100% Jared! Now we need to work on a single payer for all plan - Medicare for everyone, if you please.
  • Democrat
    Philadelphia, PA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    You did not google that information because you would have seen those stats were provided by the CDC and the AGI along with local statistic providers, so they are hardly political skewed organizations, now I know why we differ on this topic, you believe in the collective good, I don't, I believe in personal responsibility and accountability, most dictatorships start out that way, the government always knowing what's best for everyone, when you can't convince them that way ,then drag out the tired old debates of what about the children, what about the poor defenseless women, get real, I know free clinics are not free but they are free to the those who need them, I have no problem with that, BTW, feed on this, since 1995 thru 2010, numbers again provided by the CDC, 72% of all black babies born in Mississippi were aborted. Whose greater good was this for??
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Well Google must work differently for us because I copy and pasted exactly what you told me to search, which is "Birth statistic/abortion New York City." THESE were the results Google came up with for me. Regardless of how Google decides to list our search results differently, you didn't take the time to read what I actually wrote. I read the full study you are referring to and not a blog talking about it. This study was not conducted by the CDC. It was done by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.

    CLICK THIS LINK to be directed to the executive summary of the study.
    CLICK THIS LINK to be directed to the infant mortality study

    I formed my earlier response to you after actually taking the time to read everything and not a politically skewed blog about it. I encourage you to take the time and read the study yourself. You will undoubtedly approach it based off of your preconceived notions, but try to think about it in a critical light and not what you want it to say. After that, I encourage you to reread my earlier response detailing my rebuttal to your claims HERE.

    I also encourage you to reread the statistic about the aborted babies in Mississippi. The statistic is that 71.67 percent of all abortions in Mississippi from 1995 to 2010 were done by black mothers. That is entirely different than saying 71.67 percent of all black babies were aborted in Mississippi. Do you understand the massive difference between those two things?

    And how in the world did this thread ever get on the issue of black teenagers having abortions in Mississippi? Not just that, but wouldn't these numbers show you that we need to tackle poverty in the deep south so black teenagers don't feel that's their only way out? My goodness man. What's your argument here? I'm really having trouble following you now.

    This is also the second time you have had me fact check something from CSN news. This is a right wing website founded by Brent Bozell that specializes in misleading and outright false reporting. There is a very big difference between news and entertainment websites. This is like quoting something from Rush Limbaugh and talking about it like it was a study done by the Associated Press.
  • Democrat
    Philadelphia, PA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Not CSN, the CDC, I'm done!!!
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Here's the issue--there are zero CDC studies on any abortion statistics in New York City. I have scoured the CDC website extensively and have come up with absolutely nothing. They also have yet to report their national abortion statistics for the year this New York City study was conducted. The study was conducted by the New York Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, as I tried to explain earlier. The CDC always compiles their findings by states, not localities.

    I never questioned that you thought you read something done by the CDC. What I questioned is your actual source. If you took the time to read the stats about Missouri, you would realize that more white women had abortions than did black women by a number of 3,119 to 2,521.

    HERE is the full CDC study. Is this the one you were referring to?

    I challenged your use of CSN because that was the website with the top story on Google each time I typed in exactly what you told me to type in, so I came to the logical conclusion that you were basing your opinion off of an article on a right wing web site and not after reading a study by the CDC that is hundreds of pages long. I apologize if I was incorrect for assuming that.

    I do have to ask if you read this full study or an article summarizing it because it took me some serious digging to find and the numbers don't really add up to what you were putting forward with your argument.
  • Democrat
    Philadelphia, PA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Boy you are stubborn , I said I am finished discussing this with you, I find it tiresome debating an ideologue, just keep on toeing the party line, and when the stuff hits the fan, you can always claim that you were loyal until the end. Good for you.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Lobbying one red herring after another only shows your inability to debate a topic based off the parameters of a debate. I would compare this debate to a game of verbal whack-a-mole after you somehow got on the topic of the abortion rate of black women in Missouri, Mississippi, and New York City.

    To top it off you decide to throw in a nice ad hominem attack by calling me stubborn and accusing me of toeing the party line of a political party I am not a member of. We should be able to disagree without being disagreeable and resorting to name calling.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    President Obama just announced that more than 8 million Americans have signed up for health insurance, far exceeding the goal of 7 million individuals signing up for coverage.

    We also have concrete numbers that show us the young and healthy are indeed signing up for health insurance. Thirty-five percent of those enrolled are under the age of thirty-five.

    The President chastised Republicans for their laser like focus on repealing his signature legislative accomplishment and suggested that they were just going through the "stages of grief" for their inability to derail the law.

    I'm sure it's a sad day for Republicans and right wing zealots who don't know what they are angry about, but I can't help but feel a sense of joy for the millions of people who finally have a chance to receive healthcare in this country. Now we just have to convince the far right states to stop denying millions of their citizens affordable healthcare because they don't like our President.
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I watched the President's press conference...On Fox News. I wanted to see what they had to say afterward after Obama ripped the Republicans for wasting tax payers money by doing 50 plus repeals.

    The Fox News pundits are in denial, saying the actual numbers must be some 2 million lower. Some republicans are still calling for repeal..."the numbers are cooked." Ha.

    Carrying on in la la land will not fare will for them in the 2014 election. Obamacare is a winner!
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    This is the text of key points that Obama drove home in his press conference:

    8 million people signed up for private insurance in the Health Insurance Marketplace. For states that have Federally-Facilitated Marketplaces, 35 percent of those who signed up are under 35 years old and 28 percent are between 18 and 34 years old, virtually the same youth percentage that signed up in Massachusetts in their first year of health reform.

    35% of the enrollees in the federal marketplace are under age 35.

    3 million young adults gained coverage thanks to the Affordable Care Act by being able to stay on their parents plan.

    3 million more people were enrolled in Medicaid and CHIP as of February, compared to before the Marketplaces opened. Medicaid and CHIP enrollment continues year-round.

    5 million people are enrolled in plans that meet ACA standards outside the Marketplace, according to a CBO estimate. When insurers set premiums for next year, they are required to look at everyone who enrolled in plans that meet ACA standards, both on and off the Marketplace.

    5.7 million people will be uninsured in 2016 because 24 States have not expanded Medicaid.


    Notice the President's emphasis on "the market place" and the "Affordable Care Act" rather than the hated word "Obamacare".

    This is a plan born out of Republican ideas, plain and simple, from the Heritage Foundation to RomneyCare. I think many Republicans would indeed support it if it wasn't for the fact that they are compelled to spite Obama. Hate does that to their minds.

    Now Republicans are in denial about the numbers...they cannot fathom that they have been proven wrong, much like Karl Rove couldn't believe the numbers coming into Fox News on election night in 2012. They are like the humanoids in that old Star Trek series "the Borg" where the characters' minds have been completely taken over and they cannot recognize reality. Resistance is futile.

    Fear is the path to the Dark Side. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate; hate leads to suffering. --Jedi Master Yoda

    I think many Republicans are in for a lot of suffering.