A Duh Question About Obamacare

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

A Duh Question About Obamacare

I keep seeing headlines and watching the news.

Something I hear nonstop doesn't make any sense.

Obamacare is predicated on the condition that young people who don't need insurance will not only buy it, but will buy it at a higher price than they would today in order to pay for the older people.

Hasn't it occurred to anyone that the young people are not going to do it?

Duh!

I mean, the Obama administration is made up of educated adults. What the hell have they learned about human nature that makes them believe so much in the fantasy of highly altruistic young people willfully forking over their money that they keep repeating it in public with a straight face?

Even in Brazil where corruption is rampant, you would never hear a government person justify taking money from young people by claiming they will voluntarily make high payments for something they won't use for a long, long time. (The government person just takes the money and gives "that's the way it is" as reason. )

But Obama's administration is saying it and the mainstream press is pumping it.

What the hell is wrong with them?

Once again, duh.

Michael

[dldelancey]

What makes you think that young people don't need insurance? Or do you mean that young people don't need the type of coverage that Obamacare offers and/or can't afford it at the price they will have to pay?

[Selene]

That is where the mandate comes into play...

[Robert Baratheon]

The Administration doesn't expect healthy young people to voluntarily sign up, since they've already implicitly rejected that option by not purchasing health insurance. It expects to drag them kicking and screaming. Many young people simply won't do it because they're 1)civilly disobedient, 2)lazy, or 3)clueless. The penalties will then get larger, and the beatings will continue until morale improves. Or at least until a single-payer healthcare option becomes politically viable in the United States.

[Mikee]

It's not supposed to make sense. If enough people understood what the hell they were trying to do they wouldn't let them do it. It's all about setting up a situation where people don't act they way they're supposed to in order to justify forcing them to do what they won't voluntarily do "for the public good". Pure Machiavellian evil unfolding in front of our eyes. I don't think anyone will be able to do anything about it. The future flowering of personal freedom and the progress of the human race I believe will take place someplace else, not in the United States. Carol, you should be very proud.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

What makes you think that young people don't need insurance? Or do you mean that young people don't need the type of coverage that Obamacare offers and/or can't afford it at the price they will have to pay?

Deanna,

I don't mean either. I mean perceive they need.

Once young people perceive this as an obstacle to get around instead of the story they are being told, they will do it. No amount of storytelling, admonitions, guilt trips, fines, etc., from an authority will change that.

Here's an example in a different field. Everybody knows we should pay for the music we consume. Right? Enter Napster (which is no longer with us, but its progeny is) and torrents. This changed the entire music market.

No amount of telling young people they should pay for their music--and there were anti-piracy campaigns galore--made a dent in their behavior.

Obama and his folks have targeted the wrong demographic for what is essentially a charity mindset masked as investment.

As to who "needs" insurance to use doctors and hospitals, nobody, really. The way the insurance game is played has evolved from a crony capitalism con game.

You only "need" insurance now because it has become a legal obligation. Well... the insurance companies need insurance. And now, so does the government.

This is an artificial "need."

Michael

[dldelancey]

Michael,

Whenever someone says "young people don't need insurance", what I hear is "young people don't get sick" and "young people don't die" and "young people don't encounter financially catastrophic accidents." Having experienced all of those things as a young person, I know this to be untrue.

It seems you are not saying any of those things, so I will stop hearing them.

That said, I have always considered insurance to be a need. I will concede, however, that I am biased by personal experience. What I want (for myself and for young people) is for insurance companies to compete for my business and for me to be free to do business with them or not, and vice versa.

So we're in agreement then. I think.

[caroljane]

Deanna,

I understand your viewpoint. One factor though, is that today's consumer is so overwhelmed with choices between products and services, that only the most focused and organized can navigate the daily round of decision making with fortitude, let alone knowledgeable preparation. The research and homework required to sift through constantly increasing competitors for our dollars takes ever increasing time. In this important area the stakes are high.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Deanna,

We are in agreement.

And another thing. I don't think insurance is bad. I don't think it's a need like health care is, but it certainly helps when it works well.

People assess risks differently. And they have different emotional reactions to them. One person will walk into a casino, put a quarter in a slot machine, take one spin and leave. Another person will leave his entire life savings there.

Insurance is basically gambling. You are betting small regular sums of money against a jackpot of the richer company picking up the large tab when you need it.

The crony capitalists have turned health care, which to me is quite serious, into a gambling game.

Michael

[PDS]

Deanna,

I understand your viewpoint. One factor though, is that today's consumer is so overwhelmed with choices between products and services, that only the most focused and organized can navigate the daily round of decision making with fortitude, let alone knowledgeable preparation. The research and homework required to sift through constantly increasing competitors for our dollars takes ever increasing time. In this important area the stakes are high.

Which is why one should not leave such research and homework and choices to a bureaucrat, right?

[caroljane]

No, of course it is not right. But it is contributory to why some are willing to pay others to make the best choices on their behalf.

[Selene]

Deanna,

I understand your viewpoint. One factor though, is that today's consumer is so overwhelmed with choices between products and services, that only the most focused and organized can navigate the daily round of decision making with fortitude, let alone knowledgeable preparation. The research and homework required to sift through constantly increasing competitors for our dollars takes ever increasing time. In this important area the stakes are high.

Carol:

So a possible solution is to coddle them with a despicable statist plan to "force" compliance with a system which is actuarilly unsound and make sure that they do not learn how to think, evaluate and make a decision in their own self interests?

A...

[BaalChatzaf]

Deanna,

I understand your viewpoint. One factor though, is that today's consumer is so overwhelmed with choices between products and services, that only the most focused and organized can navigate the daily round of decision making with fortitude, let alone knowledgeable preparation. The research and homework required to sift through constantly increasing competitors for our dollars takes ever increasing time. In this important area the stakes are high.

Carol:

So a possible solution is to coddle them with a despicable statist plan to "force" compliance with a system which is actuarilly unsound and make sure that they do not learn how to think, evaluate and make a decision in their own self interests?

A...

Our entire public education (so-called) system is predicated on making sure students to not learn how to think or evaluate or make a decision based on their own proper self interests. The schools of our country are rigged to turn out well behaved tax paying automata.

[dldelancey]

Deanna,

I understand your viewpoint. One factor though, is that today's consumer is so overwhelmed with choices between products and services, that only the most focused and organized can navigate the daily round of decision making with fortitude, let alone knowledgeable preparation. The research and homework required to sift through constantly increasing competitors for our dollars takes ever increasing time. In this important area the stakes are high.

If medical insurers were allowed to compete freely, it would be in their best interest to make shopping their products and services as easy as possible. That said, because the stakes are high is the very reason that people should do their research and homework. Is it really so much to ask that a person be asked to make their own decisions regarding their own well-being?

[Backlighting]

With rare exception, the major opposition on T.V. to Obamacare is that it won't work or it costs too much.

It must be argued against on moral grounds, that is, it violates an individuals right to his own life & property.

[Selene]

With rare exception, the major opposition on T.V. to Obamacare is that it won't work or it costs too much.

It must be argued against on moral grounds, that is, it violates an individuals right to his own life & property.

and body, I heard tell of a woman's right to her body and I was wondering where the right of a man to his body is under the Affordable Care Act...

just wondering.

[Backlighting]

With rare exception, the major opposition on T.V. to Obamacare is that it won't work or it costs too much.

It must be argued against on moral grounds, that is, it violates an individuals right to his own life & property.

and body, I heard tell of a woman's right to her body and I was wondering where the right of a man to his body is under the Affordable Care Act...

just wondering.

And body, of course.

Plus, the naming of this monstrosity as the "Affordable Care Act" is something AR would have written in Atlas.

[Selene]

With rare exception, the major opposition on T.V. to Obamacare is that it won't work or it costs too much.

It must be argued against on moral grounds, that is, it violates an individuals right to his own life & property.

and body, I heard tell of a woman's right to her body and I was wondering where the right of a man to his body is under the Affordable Care Act...

just wondering.

And body, of course.

Plus, the naming of this monstrosity as the "Affordable Care Act" is something AR would have written in Atlas.

Ah yes, what was it, the Equalization of Opportunity Act?

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/014185.html

Let’s see. Is it just a coincidence that this urgent plan to save the planet just happens to require the shutting down of industrial activity in all the advanced industrial countries? I mean, why don’t these leftists just come and out and say: “Let’s all commit suicide”? A sort of global, or at least pan-Western, Jonestown? That’s what they really want, after all. All their policies, from redistribution of wealth to sexual freedom to immigration to multiculturalism to climate change, are aimed at Western suicide. So why not just skip these complicated preliminaries and cut to the chase? Schellnhuber and his fellow European climate advisers should issue a statement saying:

The European Advisory Council on Global Change has conducted an audit to determine which people should be allowed to continue breathing oxygen in order for life to remain sustainable on the planet. The findings are sobering. The Western nations have already exceeded their exygen quotas if you take into account past breaths. Our basic principle is that all humans have equal rights to the atmosphere. The survival of humankind on terms of equality therefore requires that all Western peoples cease to breath oxygen within two years.

[Selene]

The Equalization of Opportunity Act

Before the opening of the John Galt Line, Henry Rearden received a direct blow to his business: the Equalization of Opportunity Act. Under that Act, no one was allowed to be in more than one type of core business, so that all businessmen would have "equal opportunity" to be in business. This required him to divest himself of his ore and coal holdings, and buy ore and coal on the open market. He knew that this would make his operations that much more expensive, so on the night after the passage of the bill, he nearly gave way to despair.

What stopped him from giving way completely was his having yet another idea about bridge building. On that occasion, he conceived of a combination of a truss and an arch, that would bear even greater weight than his original truss invention. This would allow him to build the bridge with fewer raw materials, so that he would not miss his deadline. He was so excited about his discovery that he called Dagny at night to trumpet his triumph, and encourage her not to worry about people in Washington, DC who seemed to like to waste people's time.

At about this time, however, he did suffer a loss that would portend much greater trouble later on. He had hired a Washington lobbyist named Wesley Mouch to represent him before the politicians and officials. But Wesley Mouch had made himself unreachable and had not warned him about the Equalization of Oppportunity Act. Finally Mouch wrote that he had resigned. Shortly thereafter came the announcement that he was now the new Assistant Coordinator of the Bureau of Economic Planning and Natural Resources. Mouch would become the senior coordinator in less than a year.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Henry_Rearden#The_Equalization_of_Opportunity_Act

[Backlighting]

Thanks for the links Adam.

Just about everything this Administration does could be included in AR's "Horror File".

-Joe

[Selene]

Thanks for the links Adam.

Just about everything this Administration does could be included in AR's "Horror File".

-Joe

Joe:

Here is another chilling annoucement from Nancy 'Frozen Face" Pelosi, one of the most corrupt individuals in the House:

Atop her priority list as Speaker, she said, would be “comprehensive affordable, quality childcare” for working mothers, which she sees as a natural extension of ObamaCare.

“That would have the biggest impact on women, families and … job creation,” Pelosi said. “That was on President Nixon’s desk … in the ’70s, and he vetoed it for cultural or whatever reasons. And now we have to do that again.”… Of a federal childcare law, she said: “This is the missing link in so many things that we’ve talked about. It is not exhaustive of all the things we want to do or have done with regard to women, but I do think it would unleash the power of women.”

Read more at http://lastresistance.com/3511/pelosi-universal-daycare-great-addition-obamacare/#jiH4oQOfIZgZ88Y7.99

http://lastresistance.com/3511/pelosi-universal-daycare-great-addition-obamacare/

[BaalChatzaf]

Joe:

Here is another chilling annoucement from Nancy 'Frozen Face," one of the most corrupt individuals in the House:

According to the comedienne Tracy Ullman, Pelosi gets botox shots in her face so she can keep permanently an incredulous look about her.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I just had an epiphany.

The Obamcare rollout fiasco is part of a Canadian plot to take over America.

Just look at who made the website.

Michael

[Selene]

I just had an epiphany.

The Obamcare rollout fiasco is part of a Canadian plot to take over America.

Just look at who made the website.

Michael

Yep, what a perfect way to get back at us for that lil ol invasion...damn folks are awfully techy to me!

However, now the Canadians who flock to the US for actual medical care that ranks as the best in the world will have to go to Central America.

[caroljane]

Nevermind guys, Brant has been ready for retaliation for a long time, and you are both in easy reach of his Great Lakes Fleet when the Day of Destiny dawns.

He, of course, will be stuck in the southwest watching hockey replays.