Obamacare: Should I get out while I still can? - page 6

Register Today!
  1. Quote from l3wilso
    It is not about not being able to ask questions, healthcare for all is what the people wanted. Healthcare for all is not what Obama said he would give us. Free healthcare was talked about in the 90s when Clinton was in office. It did not happen. The people went to their elected officials and asked for free health care. Besides if you want personal freedom, do not ask for assistance from the government, this includes Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid (state), Unemployment, Welfare, etc. These are government programs. Just have the income needed to sustain yourself and your family and you will not have to rely on the government for assistance.
    We pay into SS and medicaid in order to draw out of it later. Saying that those who use SS and medicare are relying on the government for assistance is like saying I'm relying on my bank for assistance when I pay my bills out of my own bank account.
    nicurn001, Sanuk, laborer, and 2 others like this.
  2. Quote from l3wilso
    I agree we will definitely see an increase in minor issues with individuals arriving to the ER for service. Remember to smile, medicare will be paying based on that as well. There is nothing that can be done about it. The abuse of anything free is always present. But, healthcare for all is what people asked for.

    I think over time we will see that peeple will not abuse it much, but we will also see those that are not sick seriously will only make themselves sick as we see today.
    ER's have always been open to anyone, that's been the problem, it's been the one place where those without insurance can go. At least now they have the opportunity to seek the appropriate level of care (which then costs all of us less for the same care).
  3. Registered to point this out:

    May I kindly note that the user that started the thread has zero posting history outside of this thread. Yellow flag.

    He or she posts FUD-filled (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) and information-poor or easily-falsifiable replies to reasonable replies. Red flag.

    Once challenged, he or she posts a comprehensive list full of bad information, attempting to sour general perception of the PPACA ("Obamacare"). Yellow flag.

    When called out on any of this, he or she falls back on the standard "Well I'm allowed my opinion, AREN'T I???", apparently not understanding the difference between opinions ("I don't much care for Alternative Rock music") and facts ("Alternative Rock is a subgenre of Rock and Roll"). You can't state bad facts that you draw conclusions from, have all your facts debunked, then still defend your conclusion as "Just my opinion stop being un-American by disagreeing with me!!!!". That's bloody ridiculous and "Amanda" is arguing in very bad faith using standard PR techniques. MASSIVE red flag.

    Based on his or her posting style, falling back on multiple "trenches" of argument ("I'm just asking questions", then "Here's bad facts to support my conclusions", then "Well it's an opinion, you can't argue with an opinion", and then just dragging out the argument until less than 1 percent of readers will stick to the thread long enough to see him or her made to look foolish...) and general lack of ability to commit to a single viewpoint but instead taking a "throw a bunch of stuff at the wall to see what sticks", I strongly suspect that the parent poster is a politically motivated sockpuppet; a paid-PR poster, or similar.

    I make a habit of uncovering these people (and have busted a few on other sites just for laughs or because they annoyed the hell out of everyone and were poisoning any attempt at polite discourse), and after a while you get to recognize a "type" that most shills and sockpuppets fit into, and I'm afraid that my alarm bells were going off after reading the first few posts by this bozo.

    Sorry guys, but in all probability you're arguing with someone that can't be convinced simply because they're not even arguing about their own beliefs. He or she is just trying to muddy the waters and increase the overall negative perception of the PPACA. I personally suspect funding by various insurers (who are furious about the bill's limitation of how much "administrative cost" can be extracted by them) or some large hospital organizations (who are furious that they're going to have to start being responsible for their quality of care, not just how much they can get away with billing for). They're willing to spend millions to get public sentiment back on their side, as the long-term difference for them is in the billions of dollars (of pure profit, extracted from consumers and patients).

    I'm also sorry to say that it's only going to get worse... Normally this kind of garbage used to only be directed at the "politically interested" few percent of people on large news aggregator websites or special-interest ones such as global warming-related discussion sites. Unfortunately, the tools ("persona management systems", etc) available to people like our friend here have gotten exponentially better in the last 5-10 years, and you're going to have to start dealing with them on much more general-interest sites or less-political specialty sites such as this one.

    Sorry about the long rant, but it needed to be said. Happy holidays, friends!
    myelin, nicurn001, laborer, and 1 other like this.

Online Readers: 1 (0 members & 1 guests)