Current Events

I don't believe Obamacare is meant to make healthcare "free." I believe it's purpose is to make sure people have access to healthcare (getting rid of pre-existing conditions) and make it so insurance companies can't say, "Nah, we ain't paying for that" when you need your insurance company to come through in your time of need.

I'm not in favor of government run healthcare but I'm also not in favor of the insurance companies running it either like it was before. Insurance companies only gave a damn about their bottom line and allowed plenty of people to go bankrupt or even die leaving people hanging.

Thankfully for me, no change was necessary.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stan HAMsen

Ok, so total :fp: on me for even asking, but...

Y'all don't think it's tacky that the owner is telling people to tip 3% less to offset the charge?

The impression I get from the article is that the owner cares much less about his employees and much more about protesting the healthcare law.

---

I think the point is more that someone has to pay for your healthcare and insurance.....and it is not going to be him and I don't blame him.......dickish way to go about it, maybe but perhaps if our government instructors taught basic economics we would not be in this mess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by souljahbill

I don't believe Obamacare is meant to make healthcare "free." I believe it's purpose is to make sure people have access to healthcare (getting rid of pre-existing conditions) and make it so insurance companies can't say, "Nah, we ain't paying for that" when you need your insurance company to come through in your time of need.

I'm not in favor of government run healthcare but I'm also not in favor of the insurance companies running it either like it was before. Insurance companies only gave a damn about their bottom line and allowed plenty of people to go bankrupt or even die leaving people hanging.

---

Do you think the auto insurance industry should be forced to eliminate pre-existing conditions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SCClassof93

Do you think the auto insurance industry should be forced to eliminate pre-existing conditions?

---

What does that even mean?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by souljahbill

What does that even mean?

---

Drunk Person "X" has a car accident w/o any auto insurance coverage injuring people (A B C). A, B and C sue X. Under Obamacare's logic X has a "right" to force an insurance company to immediately defend them in the lawsuit and pay for the damages X has caused.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by souljahbill

What does that even mean?

---

Its far right wing logic, don't try to understand it just say okay.

You were correct in your first assumption about the rationale behind the law if you guys have ever sold insurance you would know the BS insurance companies were doing to people; guys like CLW take everything to the extreme politically, when as 99% of things in life the truth falls somewhere in the middle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CLW

Drunk Person "X" has a car accident w/o any auto insurance coverage injuring people (A B C). A, B and C sue X. Under Obamacare's logic X has a "right" to force an insurance company to immediately defend them in the lawsuit and pay for the damages X has caused.

---

Are we really comparing someone who drove drunk and killed people to someone who was born with a condition or someone who is in cancer remission and can't get coverage from anyone because of their pre-existing condition?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by souljahbill

Are we really comparing someone who drove drunk and killed people to someone who was born with a condition or someone who is in cancer remission and can't get coverage from anyone because of their pre-existing condition?

---

NOOOOO!!!!! they are sucking into an argument !!!! Don't help the post count! :0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oweb26

NOOOOO!!!!! they are sucking into an argument !!!! Don't help the post count! :0

---

LOL! I won't say anymore. I posted before I saw your other post. I'm done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by souljahbill

Are we really comparing someone who drove drunk and killed people to someone who was born with a condition or someone who is in cancer remission and can't get coverage from anyone because of their pre-existing condition?

---

No, I was discussing insurance, what it means as a business etc. I think you and oweb are discussing an entitlement and obligating some to pay for the responsibilities of others. Carry on and do elaborate on how I should take care of strangers just because I can.....also explain how those being taken care of will continue (in the future) to have the liberty to make choices contrary to what those (the ones paying the bill) think is good for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oweb26

Its far right wing logic, don't try to understand it just say okay.

You were correct in your first assumption about the rationale behind the law if you guys have ever sold insurance you would know the BS insurance companies were doing to people; guys like CLW take everything to the extreme politically, when as 99% of things in life the truth falls somewhere in the middle.

---

Bs? Do you go to work for fun? Helping others? Why should insurers? :fp:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SCClassof93

Bs? Do you go to work for fun? Helping others? Why should insurers? :fp:

---

I am going to say one thing on the matter, I agree 100% with what Soulja said about why the government got into it in the first place but I also don't think the government should be in the insurance business. The entire industry needed an overhaul not another provider.

Case in point isn't that the point of paying insurance to get help when you need it? So yes helping others is kinda there thing, that's why they get paid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oweb26

I am going to say one thing on the matter, I agree 100% with what Soulja said about why the government got into it in the first place but I also don't think the government should be in the insurance business. The entire industry needed an overhaul not another provider.

Case in point isn't that the point of paying insurance to get help when you need it? So yes helping others is kinda there thing, that's why they get paid.

---

The reason medical services and insurance (which is not about "help" btw) cost so much for those of us actually paying is that so many receive its benefits for FREE. Insurance is about protecting against a possible future issue or loss. If something is pre-existing then you are not insuring against anything. No this is just more "entitlement" etc.........the responsible in society carrying more of the burden........it will collapse one way or another.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SCClassof93

The reason medical services and insurance (which is not about "help" btw) cost so much for those of us actually paying is that so many receive its benefits for FREE. Insurance is about protecting against a possible future issue or loss. If something is pre-existing then you are not insuring against anything. No this is just more "entitlement" etc.........the responsible in society carrying more of the burden........it will collapse one way or another.......

---

Okay

Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oweb26

Okay

Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk

---

Glad you came to your senses :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SCClassof93

Glad you came to your senses :D

---

Lol well played

Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SCClassof93

I think the point is more that someone has to pay for your healthcare and insurance.....and it is not going to be him and I don't blame him.......dickish way to go about it, maybe but perhaps if our government instructors taught basic economics we would not be in this mess.

---

I think you and I are on the same page with this specific story. I would rather see this guy go the traditional route - raising prices to customers - rather than encouraging those customers to pay less for the service of his staff. I think it would be just as effective to protest by adding a note on receipts that say 'you paid $x.xx more today so we could comply with Obamacare', the same way grocery stories and gas stations show savings earned with loyalty programs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stan HAMsen

I think you and I are on the same page with this specific story. I would rather see this guy go the traditional route - raising prices to customers - rather than encouraging those customers to pay less for the service of his staff. I think it would be just as effective to protest by adding a note on receipts that say 'you paid $x.xx more today so we could comply with Obamacare', the same way grocery stories and gas stations show savings earned with loyalty programs.

---

The point is, who pays? This guy is having his costs of labor go up artificially by the government and it is for his employees. In essence he is telling his customers that his cost and their cost has gone up due to government mandate.....the so called benefit goes to the employees....well let them pay for their stuff and that is his point.

Out there on the far left apparently the Government CAN prohibit you from wearing a U.S. Flag T-Shirt b/c apparently we live in Mexico now. Who knew?

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...7/11-17858.pdf