tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

I've read all of the arguments, both valid and plain stupid, against Obamacare. There's been a lot of false info floated to discredit the plan. But take a moment and check this link out and then tell me what you think. For the sake of discussion, let's assume the information is reliable. If it's not, that's another story. But for now assume it's legit. Does this change anyone's mind on the right? Remember, this is for opponents only.

[url[http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/07/05/obamacare-it-s-cheaper.html?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=cheatsheet_afternoon&cid=newsletter%3Bemail%3Bcheatsheet_afternoon&utm_term=Cheat%20Sheet[/url]

Archy Loc: Lake Hamilton, Florida

Robert Graybeal Loc: Myrtle Beach

I must be a dummy.
I thought the bill will try to force people to buy health insurance or pay a penalty.
I was not aware that the penalty to be paid included health care coverage.

charlie Loc: Minneapolis, Minnesota

I red it and I'm sold. Count me in, cheeper is good.

RTR Loc: West Central Alabama

Assume = ASS / U / ME

jerryg Loc: NE Pa

You have to buy car liability insurance in order to register your car - right. What's the difference if you are required to have health insurance. Same thing.

RTR Loc: West Central Alabama

Uhh, no. IF I have a car I have to have car insurance. No car, no insurance.

If I just sit in my house and breathe I now have to buy health insurance.

derekmadge Loc: Waterloo, Ontario,Canada

I'm a Canadian so the back and forth has largely missed my radar. So I don't know how valid this view is, from the sweltering Northland. My understanding is that the bill was "watered down" (the most common phrase I hear) in political negotiations so that much of it is the result of Republican/opposition influence. Yet it continues to be attacked by Republican politicians, (and were there a few Democrats too?).

So what I wonder is , -assuming my perception is right -other than a catchy (though pretty worn out) phrase, why is it called "Obamacare" when the massive American system of oppositional politics forged it? I know your elected President got the ball rolling but were there not a lot of American people and their representatives playing on the field?

jerryg Loc: NE Pa

Who should pay for your health care - everyone else. Take care of yourself. Yeah health insurance is expensive but certainly those people and businesses in that field are the cause of it.

AUminer Loc: Brandon, Ms

This is a state decision not a Federal law and not all states require it. Also, I don't have to pay it if I do not own a car.

charlie Loc: Minneapolis, Minnesota

Your analogy is really flawed. Liability (auto) insurance is required to protect the other party from accident expenses, not so with health insurance. Health insurance covers MY expenses. If I prefer to pay out-of-pocket i will lose that right.

ted45 Loc: Delaware

JerryG "You have to buy car liability insurance in order to register your car - right. What's the difference if you are required to have health insurance. Same thing."

RTR is correct: You do not have to buy a car. Many people in the major cities like New York, Phila, Baltimore, etc do not. If you by a car the risk which includes were you live, your age, sex, driving record, and value of your car is reviewed and a premium is computed. You have the option of the amount of liability and physical damage to purchase. The same is true of your home and your life. No one pays the same because we all have different circumstances. For you libs this is called individualism.

If you present a greater risk to the insurance company you pay a higher premium or if you have a history of accidents you are denied coverage and must go into a higher cost, high risk pool. That system has worked fine since Ben Franklin invented it.

The oppositon to OCare is not an opposition to health care reform. It is oppositonn to the government taking away yet another right to choose how we live our lives. If I choose not to by a car and insurance or not to by a home and insurance or not to buy life insurance; that is my right.

With the so-called "Affordable Health Care Act" you have no choice. The arguement that if I don't have health care and get sick someone else is going to pay for it is wrong. If I don't have care and get seriously ill I will not recover and possibly die. That is my right as a citizen of the United States of America. The government does not have the right to make my decisions for me. The health care act says that upon review a committee may decide that I must join a health club and workout X number of hours a week. That may be a good idea but it is my choice to make, not the choice of some faceless committee of bureaucrats. Again under the act you have no choice.

An insurance company can only make a profit if they can determine the risk they are exposed to. The link provided by tschmath uses this example: In 2012 "But as an example, a non-smoking 26-year-old male in Pennsylvania could pay about $325 a month, or $3,900 annually."

In 2014 "A 26-year-old single adult who pulls in $30,000 a year will be able to buy a policy through an exchange for an estimated $3,391, according to the Kaiser Foundation. After a tax credit of $882, he’d pay $2,509." is shown. ( Tax credit is given only after you spend the money. So the out of pocket expense is still $3,391.)

Today $30,000 a year in Pennsylvania is just getting by. The projected premium of $282 a month two years from now would be a problem TODAY.

TSCHMATH let me ask you a question: If I know for a fact that I am going to spend $300 a month on drugs for the rest of my life and I come to you to help out. Would you give me the money? What if the government told you that you must help me and in exchange I must pay you $100 a month? What would be your response? This is exactly what ObamaCare is saying to the insurance industry.

You libs don't pay attention to the important words in your examples. Words like estimated, should, if, most likely.

tsomes Loc: Fargo ND

Not quite the same thing. No one is forcing me to buy a car. The federal government does not force me to buy car insurance As an adult, legal citizen, I have certain rights and responsibilities. Far too much emphasis is placed on rights and not the responsibilities that go with those rights. For example, as a young person, I had a responsibility to do well in school and prepare myself for the adult world. As an adult, it is my responsibility to secure my finances by making good choices about how I manage my resources. I need to understand the differences between wants and needs. I might want a smart phone, but a pre-paid phone will still keep me connected for much less money. I want a new computer to replace the one that crashed a few month ago, but I don't need it.

Politicians on both sides have done us all a great disservice for far too many years. Remember, the government can't give you anything without first taking something away from you. Our rights do not come from the government, but from out creator. It is a totally different mind set.

I have no delusions that anything I say here or what other people will say, will change anyone's opinions one way or the other. As I have been saying for years, if you believe something, then the facts don't matter.

jkaye65 Loc: Chico, CA

All I know is that Obama-Care is a 100% guarantee that my health insurance rates will cost me more (the cost of everything the government touches skyrockets in price). I will be paying for those who choose to use their monthly welfare checks to buy cigarettes, beer, twinkies and pop tarts instead of having a job and buying necessary items.

Jim Plogger Loc: East Tennessee

Not so fast there. Car liability insurance is to protect others from you. You are not required to buy collision which protects you if a collision is your fault. Health insurance protects you only. There is no requirement for you to have any type of car insurance that protects you only. So, yes, there is a big difference.