No you didn't London. You made a statement that the ER abuse will be magically stopped but failed to explain how or why. 6k deductible, you can't get around that. You gave one example of an OPINION that you have that has no basis in reality.
Questions asked, are you satisfied with your present health insurance/care for the first, do you support O'care for the second. You asked for links, I provided them and can keep giving more that say the same if you have that need.
FFS man, even your recaps are misguided untruths. While it's true I don't want to be forced to pay for something, I'm not even coming close to arguing from that angle. I'm arguing from the angle that you have no idea what O'care actually is or does. For proof I submit "well now people won't abuse the ER because of O'care". The right has their "the economy will collapse because of O'care" opinion too but that doesn't make it true.
Dude if you can't understand how having everyone pay into a system can help bring cost down I don't know what to tell you. It's not about people abusing the ER. Its about the cost that goes unpaid and in turn gets put back on you ( if you pay taxes).
It is still your turn but you seem stuck , so let me move along with my next
Health insurance plans can't refuse to cover you or charge you more just because you have a pre-existing health condition.
Do i have to explain how this is a good thing ??? If not your turn
Do you drive a car ????
Do you choose to pay car insurance? even if you have never been in an accident your whole life.
Again, you fail to explain HOW this ER abuse will be stopped. You have also failed to explain how everyone will PAY.
I'm in favor of not denying anyone for pre-existing conditions, but I also understand this allows people to not buy insurance until necessary. There is presently no mechanism that forces people to pay. People operate in their own best interests, what economical incentive is there for someone to voluntarily give money for something they don't need or HAVE to have?
Your arguments so far is that ER abuse will stop even though a 6K deductible is still present and that everyone will pay even though there is no mechanism in place to make this happen. Your arguments are based on fantasy not reality. I thought you wanted to show me how good O'care is, not how good you THINK O'care CAN be.
You can stop playing if you want, what you are doing by continuing your line is to prove my point.
Debate break have to go open shop. Someone called off ill....but it is still your turn ginwilly.
Do you drive a car ????
My bike insurance is way cheaper than my car insurance. Making me buy car insurance for my bike would be like requiring women to be covered for prostrate exams.
Again, you fail to explain HOW this ER abuse will be stopped. You have also failed to explain how everyone will PAY.
I'm in favor of not denying anyone for pre-existing conditions, but I also understand this allows people to not buy insurance until necessary. There is presently no mechanism that forces people to pay. People operate in their own best interests, what economical incentive is there for someone to voluntarily give money for something they don't need or HAVE to have?
Your arguments so far is that ER abuse will stop even though a 6K deductible is still present and that everyone will pay even though there is no mechanism in place to make this happen. Your arguments are based on fantasy not reality. I thought you wanted to show me how good O'care is, not how good you THINK O'care CAN be.
You can stop playing if you want, what you are doing by continuing your line is to prove my point.
I sure don't and because of that choice, I don't pay for car insurance either. Oops, where does your argument go now?
Car insurance requirements stem from a personal choice to own and operate a motor vehicle. Forcing an individual to buy a product from a corporate entity, simply because he/she exists is heinous, no matter how you try to justify it.
I agree but we should go with what can help the most.
Helping people redistribute other people's property isn't really being "helpful", it's kind of like theft, in fact it is.
Helping people redistribute other people's property isn't really being "helpful", it's kind of like theft, in fact it is.
how is it theft when no redistribution can take place until consent is obtained?
why so waaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh? mommy forget to change your diaper again?