"Obamacare found Constitutional"

[SR4]

So after having a kneejerk reaction to the pathetic upholding of the plan deemed "Obamacare" by the media networks, I sat down and read a couple of enlightening articles. I also managed to finally read large chunks of the ruling and the opposition.

 

 

It seems to be there is a glimmer of hope in an otherwise abyssmal situation, but let's get the bad out of the way first:

 

1) The plan isn't actually all that effective. This is essentially a forced tax on not buying into a private health insurance provider. Granted, there are incentives and federal subsidies for Americans well under the poverty line, but does that really alleviate the problem? (hint hint im a big fan of UHC despite my occasional Federalist leanings) If anything the plan is more or less complete federal subsidization of the insurance industry, but still privatized to the point that no meaningful centralized legislation can ever be effective in regulating the absurd price gouging/legal manipulation of these plans. Again, respect to the fact that now the high roller "Cadillac" insurers are greatly restricted on their income allowances per customer depending on their condition, but let's be honest, how easily will this be regulated? According to the verdict, the gov't can tax the lack of healthcare, but other than that it has no authority to intervene in most matters.

 

2) It will most likely get Obama re-elected. Now I know there are a lot of people here that disagree with me on this point, yes I understand he is technically the "better" candidate against Romney, but honestly the situation of our current generation should be beyond petty "lesser of two evil" arguments. Maybe he will grow a spine in the second term and push harder towards real healthcare legislation, corporate restrictions, closing tax loopholes, etc. etc. ...but from his current record there is no reason to believe that is likely to happen.

 

Oh yeah, plus all the war crimes, undeclared wars without Congressional approval, multiple violations of the War Powers Act, invasion of privacy, bypassing Geneva protocol (but what president doesn't do this? LOL AMERICA!) But that's a whole other argument altogether.

 

3)Further infuriating so called "conservative" base. This really sucks because, had an authentic UHC plan been implemented, I guarantee a large base of right-wingers would have to eventually admit the benefits far, far outweigh the pseudo-Constitutional setback arguments. Compare this type of legislation to that of the New Deal...yes, a lot of FDR's tactics were very close to out and out dictatorial manipulation of federal power, but it ended up giving electricity to half of the south, and while still pretty rough off, provided millions of jobs for the unemployed until the war boom sent privatized companies back up in profits. Some old-school Republicans still bring up the New Deal as a "failure", and while that might be argued in some far-reaching aspects, overall it is indisputable that the majority of the legislation was a safety net that prevented the entire economic structure of the United States to collapse.

 

But because we have this half assed policy that essentially is a tax on people making over the poverty marker to buy insurance as well as yet another corporate welfare structure, it is easy to see why right-wingers will continue to violently oppose any meaningful idea of socialized healthcare policy. In the meantime, their media outlets are incredibly successful in spinning the whole debacle. If anything, most neo-cons would in their right minds be jumping for joy at the Supreme Court's decision, as not only does it guarantee the survival of an incredibly corrupt insurance racket, but also leaves the Commerce Clause and other interstate legislation up for interpretation. If Bush had been president during this decision, Cheney would have probably blown his load all over the Oval Office.

 

Ok, so that is a lot of suck. But SMetty, isn't there any good in all of this?

 

Yes. Im actually being positive for once about recent gov't induced legislation.

 

The mere fact that this was found constitutional at the very least keeps the doors open for further debate and advancement on the systemic healthcare problem we are experiencing. If anyone can remember, Bill Clinton attempted to pass pretty major healthcare legislation in 1993, saying that it would eventually lead to a solid UHC for all American citizens. By 1994, vocal opposition from almost everyone in the sphere of government and privatized economic interests completely ripped the bill apart, and "the Healthcare issue" was essentially dead and buried for well over a decade. The only time it came up was when Dems and Reps were arguing about how to better privatize the industry (thus supposedly increasing efficiency and bringing down patient costs).

 

So there is possibility for improvement in the future, given that talk still continues and that people affirm that this current plan is nowhere near sufficient for the American people.

 

Ahh..ok, so Im finished my ranting. What do you all think?

[Guest Mirezzi]

I didn't get a chance to thoroughly read all of your post, but from my perspective, there is no way in fucking HELL that the so-called conservative base would get behind ANY form of UHC. They treat anything Universal as theft.

 

Hence, this sort of shit is all over the internets now:

 

 

If people burglarize homes, even if it were to pay for health insurance for their sick children, they would be prosecuted. But this kind of plunder can be made legal via legislation. Everything Hitler did was perfectly legal, but it was immoral. A government cannot be both just and philanthropic for it has nothing which it has not forcibly taken.

 

People often use governments for immoral plunder. If you receive something from the government it has been plundered from someone else. Be it money or services or any kind of property.

 

Etc. Etc.

 

The only thing the conservative fucktard base want to buy is defense contracts aka. millions and millions of penis fetishes.

 

You're absolutely right that Obamacare in its current form will be largely ineffective and must be treated, with a modest dose of wishful thinking, as a step in the right direction. Unfortunately, it's still business as usual in terms of keeping insurance companies A. hilariously rich and B. one of the most powerful lobbies in DC.

[Hoodie]

for me, it's sad how the lower middle class is essentially getting screwed with this policy (being in that grey area where you're not below the poverty line so you can't qualify for medicaid but you sure as hell don't have the extra $400 a month to put your family on insurance). i feel like politicians are trying to dismantle the middle class at every turn with these shitty economic decisions.

[SR4]

for me, it's sad how the lower middle class is essentially getting screwed with this policy (being in that grey area where you're not below the poverty line so you can't qualify for medicaid but you sure as hell don't have the extra $400 a month to put your family on insurance). i feel like politicians are trying to dismantle the middle class at every turn with these shitty economic decisions.

 

yeah, and honestly this brings out the paranoid libertarian nut in me that thinks the purpose is to create such a strong class divide that it will prop up essentially two supposedly different ideologies but both ruled dictatorially (Sovietesque "we are the people!" vs. some sort of Fascist "the corporations and nationalism are what founded this country! Defend them with your lives!")

[SR4]

I didn't get a chance to thoroughly read all of your post, but from my perspective, there is no way in fucking HELL that the so-called conservative base would get behind ANY form of UHC. They treat anything Universal as theft.

 

Hence, this sort of shit is all over the internets now:

 

 

If people burglarize homes, even if it were to pay for health insurance for their sick children, they would be prosecuted. But this kind of plunder can be made legal via legislation. Everything Hitler did was perfectly legal, but it was immoral. A government cannot be both just and philanthropic for it has nothing which it has not forcibly taken.

 

People often use governments for immoral plunder. If you receive something from the government it has been plundered from someone else. Be it money or services or any kind of property.

 

Etc. Etc.

 

The only thing the conservative fucktard base want to buy is defense contracts aka. millions and millions of penis fetishes.

 

You're absolutely right that Obamacare in its current form will be largely ineffective and must be treated, with a modest dose of wishful thinking, as a step in the right direction. Unfortunately, it's still business as usual in terms of keeping insurance companies A. hilariously rich and B. one of the most powerful lobbies in DC.

 

You make a really good point, but I wouldn't think those far-far right insane people with little to no concept of reality would ever be swayed by logic. Im talking about a lot of the centrist voting bloc who have been disillusioned with Republicans, but feel that they have no other choice...these are the same people that created the era of the "Blue-Dog", former Republicans or Goldwater conservatives that were incredibly supportive of some of Lyndon Johnson and Kennedy's education and poverty assesment platforms.

 

edit: I feel like I blather on way too much here sometimes, I really genuinely want to hear everyone's thoughts on this.

[goDel]

What I think? In short: I don't understand how you can label Obama as spineless regarding the Healthcare act. Sure, it's not what you want. But it's a friggin Healthcare act which is passed. Seeing the shitstorm the current - in your eyes - pisspoor watered down version already has got, it's seems pretty spinefull to pass this version anyways.

 

It is an improvement over the current situation. Perhaps not the ideal solution, but the thing is: there is no ideal solution. Improvement is the only realistic option. To me, this seems like the maximum possible under the current conditions. So, in short: well done Obama. Congratulations.

 

And at the first point: wasn't there also a possibility for small businesses to buy insurance from the government? And wasn't there supposed to be tighter regulation on the pricing of insurance companies? Even without the pricing regulation, I'm sure the added competition with the new federal health insurer creates more competition in the market. I admit I haven't read the details, but from the bits and pieces I gather I'd say it's perhaps not as hopeless as I read in your analysis.

[SR4]

spineless as in he quickly reverted from his original plan when the Dems owned the Senate to allowing insurance companies to dictate the terms.

 

the rest i think we pretty much agree on...did you read the last part?

 

edit: I would only consider this act an improvement in the sense that it will allow for continued public relevance, rather than the benefits on the healthcare system itself.

[goDel]

spineless as in he quickly reverted from his original plan when the Dems owned the Senate to allowing insurance companies to dictate the terms.

 

the rest i think we pretty much agree on...did you read the last part?

 

Will read again...perhaps I've missed a thing here and there

[gmanyo]

Why can't we just have gov health care? It works fucking awesome in Taiwan. Or maybe the government can just force the health care companies to not charge ridiculous amounts of money. But I guess that'd be unconstitutional or something.

 

Can we just alter the constitution a bit? Considering the amount of change that the world has gone through it's not surprising that the document doesn't hold up well in every aspect. Hell, it's amazing that it still functions at all; it's quite an amazing document, especially amendment numero uno.

 

edit:

spineless as in Guantanamo bay

[goDel]

I'm happy with your last paragraphs. Good points. The door to improvement is open. Not wide-open. But open and put into legal (and constitutionally valid) text. It's past the stage of just good ideas.

 

I'm not so sure about the lower middle class being screwed, btw. Odds are that people with jobs buy their insurance through their boss/work. And seriously, I expect businesses might actually see the premiums getting (way) cheaper. And the lower middle class will indirectly have positive side effects through this. Affordable healthcare insurance through their job.

 

And people without a job (for a considerable time) tend to fall in the medicaid category, right?

 

@gmanyo: because Taiwan, through the eyes of the US, is a communist "country". Although the label "country" depends on what China allows the US to think....

[gmanyo]

@gmanyo: because Taiwan, through the eyes of the US, is a communist "country". Although the label "country" depends on what China allows the US to think....

 

I think that Taiwan is actually viewed as the shining democratic light of Asia in some ways. Or it used to be, at any rate. Too bad they fucked up their chances in the U.N.

[goDel]

Tangentially: holy shit

 

 

The British drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline agreed to plead guilty to criminal charges and pay $3 billion in fines for illegally promoting the antidepressants Paxil and Wellbutrin and for failing to report safety data about the diabetes drug Avandia, federal prosecutors announced Monday.

 

 

The settlement marks the largest payment ever by a drug company, eclipsing the previous record of $2.3 billion set by Pfizer in 2009, the government said.

 

“Today’s multibillion-dollar settlement is unprecedented in both size and scope,” said James M. Cole, the deputy attorney general. “It underscores the administration’s firm commitment to protecting the American people and holding accountable those who commit health care fraud.”

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/03/business/glaxosmithkline-agrees-to-pay-3-billion-in-fraud-settlement.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

[gmanyo]

Tangentially: holy shit

 

 

The British drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline agreed to plead guilty to criminal charges and pay $3 billion in fines for illegally promoting the antidepressants Paxil and Wellbutrin and for failing to report safety data about the diabetes drug Avandia, federal prosecutors announced Monday.

 

 

The settlement marks the largest payment ever by a drug company, eclipsing the previous record of $2.3 billion set by Pfizer in 2009, the government said.

 

“Today’s multibillion-dollar settlement is unprecedented in both size and scope,” said James M. Cole, the deputy attorney general. “It underscores the administration’s firm commitment to protecting the American people and holding accountable those who commit health care fraud.”

 

http://www.nytimes.c...ner=rss&emc=rss

fucking awesome

[Guest RandySicko]

WHY? Why is all of this is such a suprise to everyone? But I guess it makes sense, considering the amount of people who still swallow the bullshit they are being fed through the msm via the best brainwashing device ever created. Can't wait until the next staged terror attack (Olympics '12 anyone?) which will further hammer down the public's willingness to give up their freedoms and rights in the name of "security" or "health benefits".

 

Obamacare? HA. Should be on the lower end of the worry list

 

How about

-Martial Law Directives

-Homeland Security buying 450 million rounds of hollowpoint rounds

-Desensitizing campaingns such as - http://www.1up.com/n...riots-coming-13

-National Defense Authorization Act

 

I wish so many people weren't blinded by the false left-right paradigm and the illusion of choice. Things are only going ot get worse and a one world government is not as far off as it may seem.

[jhonny]

Hopefully it's a foot in the door to further improvements. Still find it staggering that the US spends twice as much as the UK on healthcare, and we have better outcomes across the board (and we're pretty unhealthy to be honest). Hopefully Obama will continue to sort out the mess.

[jhonny]

Tangentially: holy shit

 

 

The British drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline agreed to plead guilty to criminal charges and pay $3 billion in fines for illegally promoting the antidepressants Paxil and Wellbutrin and for failing to report safety data about the diabetes drug Avandia, federal prosecutors announced Monday.

 

 

The settlement marks the largest payment ever by a drug company, eclipsing the previous record of $2.3 billion set by Pfizer in 2009, the government said.

 

“Today’s multibillion-dollar settlement is unprecedented in both size and scope,” said James M. Cole, the deputy attorney general. “It underscores the administration’s firm commitment to protecting the American people and holding accountable those who commit health care fraud.”

 

http://www.nytimes.c...ner=rss&emc=rss

 

yup, big news. GSK's pipeline isn't looking particularly fruitful, so they could struggle after this.

[joshuatxuk]

for me, it's sad how the lower middle class is essentially getting screwed with this policy (being in that grey area where you're not below the poverty line so you can't qualify for medicaid but you sure as hell don't have the extra $400 a month to put your family on insurance). i feel like politicians are trying to dismantle the middle class at every turn with these shitty economic decisions.

 

yeah, and honestly this brings out the paranoid libertarian nut in me that thinks the purpose is to create such a strong class divide that it will prop up essentially two supposedly different ideologies but both ruled dictatorially (Sovietesque "we are the people!" vs. some sort of Fascist "the corporations and nationalism are what founded this country! Defend them with your lives!")

 

As a lower middle-class state worker I know exactly how this feels. I'm lucky to have health insurance through my job, but it's basically month-to-month living. Any rent that is dramatically lower is offset with gas wasted sitting in traffic. Many people I know live or get support from their parents or are in a lot of debt. Arguably, the "upper middle-class" could qualify - I know people who make 250k and literally don't earn anything until April (33% tax) and since this country isn't remotely socialized they don't really see any kickback. And they're too honest and/or not rich enough to take advantage of stock and investment loopholes.

 

Adding to the frustration is all the sudden government skepticism and disapproval from people I know who say they are "conservative" - it's either rooted in social conservative bullshit or hypocritical opinions that were non-existent under W. I can easily talk to people who were Ron Paul fans, libertarians, fair tax supporters, paleo-conservatives BEFORE Obama was elected. Otherwise all the Tea Party supporters are the same ones who spewed "patriot" bile in the face of any War on Terror criticism under Bush. And it's sad to see Mitt Romney apologize for passing the health reform in Massachusetts, the same reform that has made the state the highest ranked state in regards to quality Women's Health treatment (and highly rated compared to the rest of the country).

 

And honestly, the Fascist "the corporations and nationalism are what founded this country! Defend them with your lives!" mentality is in place. That's why defense spending (i.e. massive military-industrial complex handouts) is never going to get reformed. It's sold to us by the corrupt Republicans and accepted by the corrupt Dems. The sincere office-holders achieve just enough to keep us from being totally fucked at the moment but are drowned out and ignored otherwise. Everyone else is spewing distracting rhetoric to keep the voting population pissed off, divided, and utterly ignorant.

[Guest chunky]

You'll get taxed a lot more in the most devious ways and your government will do more of telling you what to eat etc

American debt will rise to insane levels, the debts being held by a small cabal of bankers who believe they are kings

In the long term, the USA wont be the leading country in the world any more, the companies including arms and health companies will leech off the decline

Social democracy ain't compatible with being a free and independent republic because it's a fraudulent ideology whose purpose is not what its main proponents say it is

In the short term it will work and people will get healthcare that they didnt pay for

And I dont really care because it's not my country

[HoA]

You are not a party to the constitution. (Padelford, Fay & Co. vs. The Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah. 14 Georgia 438, 520)

 

"No private person has a right to complain by suit in court on the ground of a breach of the United States constitution; for, though the constitution is a compact, he is not a party to it."

[Guest RandySicko]

You are not a party to the constitution. (Padelford, Fay & Co. vs. The Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah. 14 Georgia 438, 520)

 

"No private person has a right to complain by suit in court on the ground of a breach of the United States constitution; for, though the constitution is a compact, he is not a party to it."

 

Old news. The constitution is violated because there is no punishment for violating it. Try using the constitution as your defense in a courtroom and see who is in contempt.

[eugene]

WHY? Why is all of this is such a suprise to everyone? But I guess it makes sense, considering the amount of people who still swallow the bullshit they are being fed through the msm via the best brainwashing device ever created. Can't wait until the next staged terror attack (Olympics '12 anyone?) which will further hammer down the public's willingness to give up their freedoms and rights in the name of "security" or "health benefits".

 

Obamacare? HA. Should be on the lower end of the worry list

 

How about

-Martial Law Directives

-Homeland Security buying 450 million rounds of hollowpoint rounds

-Desensitizing campaingns such as - http://www.1up.com/n...riots-coming-13

-National Defense Authorization Act

 

I wish so many people weren't blinded by the false left-right paradigm and the illusion of choice. Things are only going ot get worse and a one world government is not as far off as it may seem.

 

[azatoth]

Americans seem really obsessed with their constitution. Sure, it was pretty ground-breaking when it was written, but geez ease up a bit. It's not like the founding fathers were infallible and the constitution the word of god, no matter what some wingnuts would make you believe.

[sweepstakes]

Americans seem really obsessed with their constitution. Sure, it was pretty ground-breaking when it was written, but geez ease up a bit. It's not like the founding fathers were infallible and the constitution the word of god, no matter what some wingnuts would make you believe.

 

We yanks are big fans of extolling old documents that we're not interested in actually reading.

[gmanyo]

Americans seem really obsessed with their constitution. Sure, it was pretty ground-breaking when it was written, but geez ease up a bit. It's not like the founding fathers were infallible and the constitution the word of god, no matter what some wingnuts would make you believe.

 

We yanks are big fans of extolling old documents that we're not interested in actually reading.

 

As much as I usually agree with living constitutionalists, I actually think that they're often wrong in their interpretations of the document. We really need to fix it up considering the amount of change that the world has gone through. Constitutional Convention II.

[SR4]

Americans seem really obsessed with their constitution. Sure, it was pretty ground-breaking when it was written, but geez ease up a bit. It's not like the founding fathers were infallible and the constitution the word of god, no matter what some wingnuts would make you believe.

 

We yanks are big fans of extolling old documents that we're not interested in actually reading.

 

Well, if anyone has ever known anything about American history, the Constitution has been changed dozens of times. It was intentionally made hard to do...this was a document that required years of incredibly intense and great arguments from all sides, based upon ideological foundations of the Enlightenment all the way back to the birth of the Greek concept of demos.

 

The Constitution itself is not the problem; the problem is those who interpret it and come to absurd conclusions.

 

Americans seem really obsessed with their constitution. Sure, it was pretty ground-breaking when it was written, but geez ease up a bit. It's not like the founding fathers were infallible and the constitution the word of god, no matter what some wingnuts would make you believe.

 

We yanks are big fans of extolling old documents that we're not interested in actually reading.

 

As much as I usually agree with living constitutionalists, I actually think that they're often wrong in their interpretations of the document. We really need to fix it up considering the amount of change that the world has gone through. Constitutional Convention II.

 

 

 

this would be a pretty cool thing to see in my lifetime