Jun 29, 2012 -- 11:40AM, Sigmund wrote:

Jun 29, 2012 -- 9:48AM, Ironhold wrote:

Jun 29, 2012 -- 9:33AM, TemplarS wrote:

As I said before, Ironhold: stay healthy, my friend.

That, in fact, seems to be the  health care plan favored by the insurance companies as well...

Actually, "keeling over before the law takes effect" is about the only way I can avoid going to jail at this point simply for being poor despite my best efforts.

If you are truly as poor as you imply, there are subsidies built into the Act that will negate most of the out-of-pocket expenses for you.

"Don't Buy The GOP Narrative That Obamacare Is A Tax On Middle Class-It's A Lie Designed To Mislead"

"In the opening paragraphs of Chief Justice Roberts’ opinion, he clarifies that the law specifically does not involve a tax. If it did, Roberts clarifies, the Court would have had no choice but to reject the case for lack of jurisdiction as a tax case cannot be brought until someone is actually forced to pay the tax. This is, as we know, not the case."

www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/06/2...

Oh and Sigmund. You are correct

Jun 29, 2012 -- 12:19PM, Nepenthe wrote:

Since it is mandated, all costs should be covered. 

Agreed.  Healthcare for all should be mandated, and it should be completely covered.

In other words, we should have a single payer system.

In the meantime, Obamacare is a step in the right direction.  I agree with previous posts that ideally we should cut the cord between employment and health coverage.

Exactly ...

MANY Americans want *FREE* Health Care, meaning, "Somebody ELSE Pays For It" ...

(They ALSO insist that the Health Care THEY and THEIR Families receive MUST be TOP-Line, State of The Art, Spare-NO-Expense, Highest Tech, with NO waiting for an Appointment, and NO need for a Referral to see a Specialist, etc., etc. ...) ...

Hence, the Problem ...

Jun 29, 2012 -- 10:44AM, Girlchristian wrote:

Jun 29, 2012 -- 9:10AM, teilhard wrote:

The average American Citizen wants *FREE*Health*Care* and DOESN'T really CARE how it is PAID for as long as (s)he can be cared for and doesn't cost the Patient much, if anything ... 

Jun 29, 2012 -- 1:43AM, solfeggio wrote:

So, is this Obamacare a good thing for Americans, or a bad thing? 

I didn't know what it was all about, so I did a little Googling, and I found that people responding in blogs, etc. were about equally divided as to whether this is a good thing or a bad thing.

Does this mean that all Americans have to buy health insurance or they won't be treated by doctors?  Wouldn't that be kind of expensive for a lot of people?  Health insurance premiums aren't cheap.

This all just sounds like something dreamed up by insurance companies.

And why should people have to pay a penalty if they don't have health insurance?  Sounds kind of draconian.

But why come up with all these complicated arrangements anyway?  Why doesn't America simply copy the British-style system?  It has many advantages.  Under universal care you take more responsibility for your own health, and learn how to monitor and care for your body.  You see fewer specialists because your GP treats a wide range of problems.  And there is a lot more after-hours coverage.

 

Not true. Polls show that a majority of Americans want public health care but support goes down when the discussion about raising their taxes to pay for it comes up.

As with paying for the education of others -- paying for the health care of others will probably be in the long run far less expensive and far more beneficial -- in both economic and social terms -- than assuming the world ends at one's doorstep and refusing to do so.