UnitedHealth care plans to keep much of Obama's health care regardless of Supreme court ruling

[One Brow]

Sure, that's basically the conclusion I've come to.

Do you see those two as teh only potentials sources of non-voluntary obligations to others?

 

[Mission Accomplished]

You're so naive. Insurance margins are extremely low so they rely on revenue growth to boost profits. What do you think covering everyone and everything will do to revenue?

I'm not naive nowhere in this whole thread have I said I'm anti capitalist. I just want those who are out to be socially responsible at the same time. Which doesn't happen usually so I'm praising this company even if they are going to make more money off of this press good for them.

 

[Mission Accomplished]

Looks like Aetna and Humana are joining the party

 

[franklin]

Looks like Aetna and Humana are joining the party

And that, my friends, is what collusive planning looks like. Have fun paying for 20 something deadbeats who need a few extra years of video gaming.

 

[PearlWatson]

And that, my friends, is what collusive planning looks like. Have fun paying for 20 something deadbeats who need a few extra years of video gaming.

They can actually be married with children of their own and still be on their parents insurance.

 

[Mission Accomplished]

Or going to college full time nice.

 

[Scat]

Yes, the federal case is about the mandate but if you take away the mandate than much of the new benefits are no longer economically feasible for companies. If you read the article you will see that they are keeping things like keeping wellness checkups free, allowing you to keep your kids on parents insurance until 26, no longer having lifetime limits on how much they will pay, and they will not stop coverage for preexisting conditions anymore. PROPS TO THEM!

And guess what will happen? Other companies will start doing the same thing to stay competitive! Capitalism, what a bitch!!

 

[candrew]

I haven't had a physical in 4 years. I'm healthy as a horse and have the strength of 10 men - where's my benefit in all this?

Don't worry, the insurances companies will get theirs - this means higher premiums, higher co-pays, higher out of network costs, elimination of other ancillary benefits like speaking to someone who knows english when you call their 800 number.

I can't wait for Aetna's song and dance at their annual open enrollment meeting come end of this year.

 

[franklin]

I haven't had a physical in 4 years. I'm healthy as a horse and have the strength of 10 men - where's my benefit in all this?

Don't worry, the insurances companies will get theirs - this means higher premiums, higher co-pays, higher out of network costs, elimination of other ancillary benefits like speaking to someone who knows english when you call their 800 number.

I can't wait for Aetna's song and dance at their annual open enrollment meeting come end of this year.

This, Candrew, is your very best post. See, you come off as an anti-capitalist shill for the democratic party, but that ain't it at all. This kid here sees right through the two party hack attack and should be paid attention to, as well as post A LOT more with A LOT more details.

 

[green]

Well see, that's the problem I have.

For one, the individual mandate is just plain smart. It is for price control. Orrin Hatch and many other conservatives I believe, pushed this idea in the 90s. Now, all of a sudden, they are against it? All of a sudden it's unconstitutional? Why?

It's either because a. A Democrat now suggested it. They are merely playing games to stick it to the "other" side, or B. These conservatives have now gone off the deep end and are aligning themselves with ULTRA-conservative groups/greedy insurance companies who don't want to insure these folks.

Either way, it's despicable.

If Obama included tort reform in health care reform, would conservatives all of a sudden be against that too?

See, that's why I find this upsettting. As you said,

Sad but true.

I am with Romney on this issue, and it this: This is not a job for the federal government. It is an issue to be tackled at the state level. That's the whole point if this country. If you want higher taxes but "free" healthcare, move to Mass. If you don't want any taxes and no government support, move to Texas.

There is nothing wrong with that. Each state/region has different morals and ideas of what's right and wrong. Let those areas decide what's best for them. America is diverse, let's celebrate that. The wackos on both sides seem to feel that their way is the only way, and that's not true.

We can have state sponsored healthcare with mandates AND have zeros healthcare with no mandates if we would just follow the constitution.

As bad as a liberal in Mass or CA doesn't want some Mormon in Utah telling them how to live, I don't want them telling me how to live. The great thing is, we have STATES that allow us to each live our own way and still be there for each other on BIGGER issues...if the politicians would allow that.

 

[The Thriller]

I am with Romney on this issue, and it this: This is not a job for the federal government. It is an issue to be tackled at the state level. That's the whole point if this country. If you want higher taxes but "free" healthcare, move to Mass. If you don't want any taxes and no government support, move to Texas.

There is nothing wrong with that. Each state/region has different morals and ideas of what's right and wrong. Let those areas decide what's best for them. America is diverse, let's celebrate that. The wackos on both sides seem to feel that their way is the only way, and that's not true.

We can have state sponsored healthcare with mandates AND have zeros healthcare with no mandates if we would just follow the constitution.

As bad as a liberal in Mass or CA doesn't want some Mormon in Utah telling them how to live, I don't want them telling me how to live. The great thing is, we have STATES that allow us to each live our own way and still be there for each other on BIGGER issues...if the politicians would allow that.

You don't think states will have to raise taxes in order to fund a state health care program?

Whether it's at the state or federal level, taxes will need to increase.

I'm not against state health care. But to think that your taxes won't increase because "Obamacare" is adopted at a state level ala "Romneycare" is ridiculous.

One thing that pisses me off is how we literally have trillions to piss away in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc and unchecked runaway spending in the defense budget (sooooo much fat here. Soooo much could be cut. It's theeeeeee largest ponzi scheme we have) yet we don't have enough money for something like health care. We have no problem raising taxes/going trillions into debt for "Shock and Awe" in foreign countries and to outspend everybody and their dog in defense yet we get all up in arms over spending for health care in our own country for our own people?

We support the making of death in foreign countries but do not support the saving of lives in our own? How shameful is that?

Lastly, what about death panels? I'm concerned with the death panels of insurance companies. They decide who receives health care and who doesn't. That's scary to me.

 

[Maktub]

He said there will be higher taxes in states with mandates...

 

[green]

You don't think states will have to raise taxes in order to fund a state health care program?

Whether it's at the state or federal level, taxes will need to increase.

I'm not against state health care. But to think that your taxes won't increase because "Obamacare" is adopted at a state level ala "Romneycare" is ridiculous.

One thing that pisses me off is how we literally have trillions to piss away in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc and unchecked runaway spending in the defense budget (sooooo much fat here. Soooo much could be cut. It's theeeeeee largest ponzi scheme we have) yet we don't have enough money for something like health care. We have no problem raising taxes/going trillions into debt for "Shock and Awe" in foreign countries and to outspend everybody and their dog in defense yet we get all up in arms over spending for health care in our own country for our own people?

We support the making of death in foreign countries but do not support the saving of lives in our own? How shameful is that?

Lastly, what about death panels? I'm concerned with the death panels of insurance companies. They decide who receives health care and who doesn't. That's scary to me.

My point was that if you wanted to pay more taxes and live in Mass and have healthcare, then you should have that ability. If you wanted to pay less taxes and live in Texas with no healthcare, then you should have that ability. I specifically said taxes would be higher in the state with healthcare. Re-read my first paragraph.

Now, I completely agree with your second point. I also think we should go into the UN, and tell them we will match dollar for dollar with the next highest contributing country. That right there would save the US billions every year. Ideally, I would want to be out of the UN completely, but I don't know if that is realistic at this point.