Healthcare Unconstitutional??

[4hisglory]

Anyone see that that Federal Judge declared the Obama Healthcare unconstitutional?  Don't know a lot about why, just thought it was interesting.  We'll see where this leads. 

[under13]

I dont follow these things, but I  just googled the story, and it seems like the judge does not think that everyone should have to pay for healthcare if they dont want it. I agree with that. Why should someone who is healthy have to pay for unhealthy people's medical bills?

[blyempowered]

From my understanding part of the healthcare bill the judge ruled as unconstitutional was the part that made health insurance mandatory for all citizens to have.

[betnich]

I dont follow these things, but I  just googled the story, and it seems like the judge does not think that everyone should have to pay for healthcare if they dont want it. I agree with that. Why should someone who is healthy have to pay for unhealthy people's medical bills?

When I heard that on the news I thought, "Well, California better repeal its uninsured-drivers ban".
Caught with no car insurance - they cite you and tow your car until you get coverage...same in many states...

[under13]

When I heard that on the news I thought, "Well, California better repeal its uninsured-drivers ban".
Caught with no car insurance - they cite you and tow your car until you get coverage...same in many states...

Wheres Sjon and his Apples and Oranges Pic?

[sjonathan02]

When I heard that on the news I thought, "Well, California better repeal its uninsured-drivers ban".
Caught with no car insurance - they cite you and tow your car until you get coverage...same in many states...

I heard my name. That's what should occur with those who drive with no insurance.

[LaylaMonroe]

Wheres Sjon and his Apples and Oranges Pic?

How is that apples and oranges?

If the judge ruled that it is unconstitutional to force a person to carry medical insurance on their own bodies, how is that any different from forcing a person to carry car insurance on their vehicles?

(Note: FTR, I haven't read anything on this case, so I can only respond to this particular point in the thread; and FTR, I agree that it is grossly unfair for healthy people to pay medical costs for unhealthy people. I also think it's unfair for responsible people to have to carry irresponsible people).

My health insurance policy gives a significant discount for non-smokers and another discount for those who have gym memberships. I don't get the gym discount, but the non-smoker discount takes off $60/mo. from my insurance costs, and $2.00 from my dental insurance. They did that because the costs were rising so much, and it was the safest way to make sure unhealthy people weren't messing things up for everyone.

[sjonathan02]

How is that apples and oranges?

If the judge ruled that it is unconstitutional to force a person to carry medical insurance on their own bodies, how is that any different from forcing a person to carry car insurance on their vehicles?

A person's body is theirs to do with as they please that is their right. The privilege to get from Point A to Point B via a one-ton automobile (or any other mode of transportation requiring a license) is different in that each driver doesn't just take their own body into account but also the bodies of the other drivers.

When said person violates that right (via accident or whatever), said person needs to be responsible for the damage caused.


BTJM.

[under13]

A person's body is theirs to do with as they please that is their right. The privilege to get from Point A to Point B via a one-ton automobile (or any other mode of transportation requiring a license) is different in that each driver doesn't just take their own body into account but also the bodies of the other drivers.

When said person violates that right (via accident or whatever), said person needs to be responsible for the damage caused.


BTJM.

what he said.

[nessalynn77]

Yeah, I have mixed emotions about this.  I think they may be going about it wrong.  Medicaid is already free to those who have children and no or very little income.  The next step would be to provide an affordable program like Medicaid to those who have income, but can't afford insurance or work jobs where it's not offered.  They can pay a premium based on income.  There is already a program like this in each state, but it is only for children of such families.

The other thing that needs to be looked at, is health insurance for those who don't have children and are not on SSI, but have little or no income.  Currently on a federal level, these people don't qualify for anything.  Anything they get is provided at a state or county level.  In Nevada, they get nothing.

Problem is, our gov't can't afford to cover or subsidize all of those uninsured people, unless they somehow (yet again) stick it to those who are able to pay their own insurance, and... well, frankly... that just sucks.  

Of course, the other side of it is to deal with the gross inflation of healthcare costs, but that too has a huge downside, in that the quality of care we receive in this country may suffer. The whole situation whomps.

[blyempowered]

How is that apples and oranges?

If the judge ruled that it is unconstitutional to force a person to carry medical insurance on their own bodies, how is that any different from forcing a person to carry car insurance on their vehicles?

(Note: FTR, I haven't read anything on this case, so I can only respond to this particular point in the thread; and FTR, I agree that it is grossly unfair for healthy people to pay medical costs for unhealthy people. I also think it's unfair for responsible people to have to carry irresponsible people).

My health insurance policy gives a significant discount for non-smokers and another discount for those who have gym memberships. I don't get the gym discount, but the non-smoker discount takes off $60/mo. from my insurance costs, and $2.00 from my dental insurance. They did that because the costs were rising so much, and it was the safest way to make sure unhealthy people weren't messing things up for everyone.

This

[LaylaMonroe]

A person's body is theirs to do with as they please that is their right. The privilege to get from Point A to Point B via a one-ton automobile (or any other mode of transportation requiring a license) is different in that each driver doesn't just take their own body into account but also the bodies of the other drivers.

When said person violates that right (via accident or whatever), said person needs to be responsible for the damage caused.


BTJM.

I understand. I still wouldn't call that apples and oranges, though. Maybe tangerines and oranges...

The way I see it, driving is only a privilege because the government says it is. Though I'd be afraid to live in such a country, the government COULD just as easily declare that maintaining your own body is a privilege (truth be told, we're not really that far from such assertions). When does YOUR body become MY (or the gov'ts) business? When it threatens my well-being, including the well-being of my finances. If my income is decreased directly or indirectly, partially or solely because my neighbor's poor health habits have driven up the cost of insurance, then it's my business and I don't mind the government regulating that to an extent.

That person also needs to be responsible for the damage they caused (to my finances).

Ftr though, I do see the point you're making. I think we (LGM) made that comparison once or twice before.

[berbie]

A person might be healthy at a given time.  When a calamity hits him, who is to pay?  Most people can't pay the expenses of a  catastrophic event that renders them to their backs for a long period of time, and costs tens of thousands in hospital and doctor bills.  Should they be able to wait until they have these problems to get insurance, gambling against the money of those who pay all along?   And causing others to have to pay more because of them. They won't be thrown into the street so someone or some agency, hospital, doctor or family members will have to take care of them.  It is an irresponsible mentality.   They should have to pay if they are able.  If no sickness occurs, it should be considered a blessing and the money spent balanced/equaled by the peace of mind that it purchased. 

[under13]

  They should have to pay if they are able.

Is that part of Obama's plan, or your opinion?

[betnich]

With all due respect for those who feel differently -

IMO, we all pay when the uninsured wind up in the emergency room or on Medicaid...it's just a matter of if we want to have our healthcare system stretched to the limit (and those who can already pay for those who can't, via taxes or upped premiums or inflated hospital bills) or if we choose to join a larger insured pool, as with Social Security...which way is more efficient?

[kodacolor]

I thing the social issues precivably unhealthy people will have because of this could be very very upsetting or even scarring. I imagine that this woould really hurt the chances of a precivably unhealthy person getting a job. Sure there are laws that say you can't discriminate but they're reactive and can only be used if an employer is caught and someone has proof against them.  (I think acting is the exception.)

[betnich]

I thing the social issues unhealthy people will have because of this could be very very upsetting or even scarring. I imagine that this would really hurt the chances of a unhealthy person getting a job.

That already happens - know people who have been turned down for jobs because of that...unfair but true...

[under13]

That already happens - know people who have been turned down for jobs because of that...unfair but true...

can you elaborate?

[betnich]

People who are too fat, too skinny (usually from chronic illness), handicapped, not the right race, gender or social group, too young or too old or just too ugly (in the hirers' eyes). Not just from prejudice but real or perceived uninsureability. Happens all the time.


...I know a blind man who was unemployed for almost 2 years before finally finding work...

[LaylaMonroe]

I can attest to that. (Not from personal experience, but it was covered at a class I took for HR Practices in the Church. Happens all the time, apparently.