Quantcast

For Those Opposed To The Health Law - Would You Sign And Carry This Card?

Bastion 2012/03/28 13:58:44
Related Topics: 420, Image, Health, SodaHead
Yes - I'll pay for my own heart transplant, like Cheney
No, I have health insurance so I'm not concerned about others
None of the above
You!
Add Photos & Videos

bbbb
Add a comment above

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • AbadPerez 2012/03/28 18:24:40
    None of the above
    AbadPerez
    +1
    All the people who will suffer from the damage Reps. are causing.
  • VoteOut 2012/03/28 15:34:14
    None of the above
    VoteOut
    that is kind of dumb people are not allowed to pay for their own healthcare? Just because you are against ObamaScare and a mandate does not mean you are against having health insurance but you should be allowed a choice of what kind of coverage you choose to carry. One size fits all can work when in comes to healthcare insurance. Many people take responsiblty for the their health and wellness and dont even have a doctor or completey subscribe to western medicine and Big Pharma fascist drug system that is the root of most dis-ease, So they would prefer a catostorphic coverage only, and when they need to go to the doctor for menial issues or to pay for a prescription if they choose take they pay it out of their pocket that is a very minimal cost. People will pay far more for health insurance then if they just paid for services and products directlty no middle man
  • Bastion VoteOut 2012/03/28 17:15:35
    Bastion
    +3
    Barter with chickens, right?

    How does that work for cancer? - Catostrophic coverage, right. How about if you're laid off?
  • VoteOut Bastion 2012/03/28 20:50:52
    VoteOut
    that depends on how you chose to deal with cancer and more people have died from the protocols for cancer then the cancer alone. What does laid have to do? That the problem with putting health insurance responsibility on employers that was the first biggest mistake. Western medicine is the second leading cause of death in the US second(and gaining) to CVD (cardio vascular dis-ease) another avoidable health problem. I bet you are one of those pharmaceutical lackeys that think dis-ease is caused by deficiency of prescription meds. Interesting how Big Pharma and the Insurance companies have benefited the most so far under ObamaScare have you noticed how they have doubled down and are spending billions on prescription drug commercials. They also lobbying hard for ObamaScare> There was a time when the left use to come out against big pharma and the FDA now they are all sharing the same condoms LOL
  • Bastion VoteOut 2012/03/28 23:26:56
  • VoteOut Bastion 2012/04/02 11:43:25 (edited)
    VoteOut
    cartoons are fun and there is reality. And I really dont get the point you are trying to make that before Obamacare you are paying for others and after you are not LOL this is where they lead people astray and sheepled them in
  • Bastion VoteOut 2012/04/02 12:47:48
    Bastion
    You don't realize that tax payers are right now carrying the burden for uninsured health care receipients?

    You don't realize that by having everyone pay for their own health insurance, the costs will go down for everyone?

    Well. There's your problem, right there.
  • Justin.Long 2012/03/28 14:45:21
    None of the above
    Justin.Long
    +1
    Let me ask you if this so great why so many organization asking for exemptions

    And I have no problem with buying healthcare I just don't think the government should tell us to buy it
  • Bastion Justin.... 2012/03/28 14:51:40
    Bastion
    I don't either - the only solution is single-payer.

    But how do we lower costs if everybody isn't in?
  • Justin.... Bastion 2012/03/28 14:56:10
    Justin.Long
    Single payer is just as bad instead of forcing everyone to buy you're forcing some to pay for all
  • Bastion Justin.... 2012/03/28 15:12:32
    Bastion
    Like the military.
  • Justin.... Bastion 2012/03/28 18:00:51
    Justin.Long
    yes buts its not like they just sit at home and do nothing they have a job that offers it
  • VoteOut Justin.... 2012/03/28 15:36:45
    VoteOut
    Single payer is the best option no middleman the patient pay the doctor direclty for services rendered that is single payer One person to the doctor. most doctors charge less for people paying for themselves
  • Sinpac VoteOut 2012/03/28 22:19:36
    Sinpac
    Correct me if I am wrong but under Obamacare does it not eventually go to the single payer?
  • VoteOut Sinpac 2012/04/02 11:45:14
    VoteOut
    thats what their intent is through forced failing of the system kind like what they did with investment/banking. But NOT the single payer I was refering to above
  • Reichstolz Bastion 2012/03/28 15:04:08
    Reichstolz
    Single payer is not less expensive, unless you ration access and quality.
  • Bastion Reichstolz 2012/03/28 15:12:19
    Bastion
    Health insurance companies ration access and quality - what's the difference? Other than profit?
  • Reichstolz Bastion 2012/03/28 15:15:39
    Reichstolz
    One always has the option to choose to pay for better coverage in the private market, with government you have no choice, unless you are willing to travel outside the nation to seek care.
  • Bastion Reichstolz 2012/03/28 15:21:29
    Bastion
    +2
    "One" does not have that option if "one" can't afford it, or if "one" is locked out by pre-existing conditions.

    And a single-payer system still allows those who CAN afford it to buy all the additional insurance and services they want.
  • Reichstolz Bastion 2012/03/28 15:27:09
    Reichstolz
    One always has options, there is no "option" if government controls the system.
    Look to the other "true" single payer systems, only those who travel outside their respective nations have the access to what money can buy. France had to allow private practice once again just to entice enough physicians into practicing there. You would do your argument a great service if you would take the time to educate yourself on the issue.
  • Bastion Reichstolz 2012/03/28 23:27:36
  • Reichstolz Bastion 2012/03/28 23:38:28
    Reichstolz
    Nice cartoon, it explains where you get your information from.
  • YouSirName Justin.... 2012/03/29 03:09:07
    YouSirName
    do you mind paying higher prices for your healthcare to make up for those who don't buy insurance and can't pay?
  • Justin.... YouSirName 2012/03/29 05:57:42
    Justin.Long
    It's sucks yea but if it insure tht i get good health care then so be it
  • Evil 1 2012/03/28 14:27:46
    None of the above
    Evil 1
    +1
    Let me ask this question. In 2008 while campaigning against Hillary Clinton Obama made these statements against the individual mandate:

    But back during the 2008 campaign, Obama argued strenuously against the individual mandate. In a debate in South Carolina, he said: "A mandate means that in some fashion, everybody will be forced to buy health insurance. ... But I believe the problem is not that folks are trying to avoid getting health care. The problem is they can't afford it. And that's why my plan emphasises lowering costs."

    "In February 2008, he said that you could no more solve the issue of the uninsured with an individual mandate than you could cure homelessness by ordering people to buy a home."

    Taking these statements into consideration what has changed? Why suddendly does he support the individual mandate? And most importantly why do is supporters ignore his blatant hypocrisy concerning this matter?
  • ETpro 2012/03/28 14:27:09
    None of the above
    ETpro
    I don't want to go without healthcare insurance. Lots of Americans who can't afford the high costs of an individual policy, or who have a pre-existing condition that means that without the individual mandate, they simply can't get insurance at any price. Ultimately, you don't judge a culture by its technology or its military might. If you did, Adolph Hitler would have been one of the greatest leaders of all time. But we judge a society by how it treats its poorest and weakest members.
  • Evil 1 ETpro 2012/03/28 14:34:38
    Evil 1
    While campaigning against Hillary Clinton in February 2008 Obama made the following statement:

    "A mandate means that in some fashion, everybody will be forced to buy health insurance. ... But I believe the problem is not that folks are trying to avoid getting health care. The problem is they can't afford it. And that's why my plan emphasises lowering costs."

    "You could no more solve the issue of the uninsured with an individual mandate than you could cure homelessness by ordering people to buy a home."

    What changed after he got elected? I agree that we need healthcare reform but not in the form of this legislation. And how could Obama make the above statements while running for office and then do a 180 degree turnaround regarding the mandate after being elected? This is proof that he as well as those that pasted this bill hastily in the dark of night, behind closed doors without even reading it had no idea of what they were passing or how or if it would actually work or effect the country.
  • Bastion Evil 1 2012/03/28 14:49:26
    Bastion
    The solution is single-payer. Our corporate owners wouldn't let that happen; the individual mandate (originally a Republican idea) and the Public Option were the only other ways to deal with the problem. Our corporate owners didn't like the Public Option either.

    Obama is not King - he tried to solve the problem- our corporate owners, and their shills in congress, only allowed a convoluted, half-assed solution that continued to guarantee big profits.

    The health care bill is a mess, but it solves some problems and gets more people insured.

    But it's our corporate owners who made the mess. We WILL, eventually, join the rest of the civilized world, and have a Single-Payer health care system - after this is fought out.
  • Reichstolz Bastion 2012/03/28 15:06:07
    Reichstolz
    +2
    The solution is not more government, it is less government. Remove the government from the system and costs will reduce, access will increase, and quality will continue. The ACA does not solve any issue, because the issue in the system is government.
  • Bastion Reichstolz 2012/03/28 15:17:01
    Bastion
    The solution is taking profit out of health insurance - that's 30% of the cost of healthcare right there - and shifting the cost of healthcare for the poor by burdening hospitals and doctors is the LEAST efficient way to do that.
  • Reichstolz Bastion 2012/03/28 15:23:22
    Reichstolz
    The solution is remove the disconnect between who is seeking care and who is paying for care. 30% is no where near accurate. Most medical facilities run under a 5% margin. The cost of health care is directly related to the amount consumed. Since the patient has no thought of cost, they consume more than they need. You are correct shifting costs is the least efficient, that is why to fix the issue one must remove the barrier between care and cost, that being government and insurance.
  • Evil 1 Bastion 2012/03/28 15:15:40
    Evil 1
    You still didn't answer my question. Why was Obama against the individual mandate when he was running for office but now supports it? Seems he has avoided addressing this issue.

    And I agree the healthcare bill is a mess. It is a mess because it was ill conceived and hastily passed behind closed doors without even being read. Remember Pelosi saying "we have to pass it to see what's in it." The problem is they still don't know what is in it or what the true long term cost and ramifications to the US and its citizens will be. So to pass a bill that will solve some problems while creating even more and even worse problems was outright ignorant on the part of Congress and the President. They have created a worse problem than the industry ever did and they alone are accountable for this mess.

    We need healthcare reform but not in a convoluted, ill conceived, worthless law that was passed by a contingent of morons trying to further a political agenda. Obama and his cronies have taken corruption, arrogance and ignorance to levels never seen before.
  • Bastion Evil 1 2012/03/28 15:22:45
    Bastion
    +1
    "Why was Obama against the individual mandate when he was running for office but now supports it?"

    I did answer it. Because he's not king and he supported what he could get, not what he wanted.
  • Evil 1 Bastion 2012/03/28 15:34:51 (edited)
    Evil 1
    And that is far from a realitic answer. It is nothing more than your opinion and you cannot back it up with facts. Where as I provided you proof that he didn't support the individual mandate and has yet to address the matter. That is not my opinion, it is fact.

    Furthermore your statement that he supported what he could get is ridiculous has he had control of both the House and Senate when the bill was hastily pushed through. So in reality Obama could have gotten anything he wanted and this is proven by the worthless bill they did pass.
  • Reichstolz ETpro 2012/03/28 15:07:59
    Reichstolz
    +1
    You are correct, and we have seen that government is an inefficient and ineffective solution to caring for the least among us. So the answer to the problem cannot be one that includes the biggest problem in the system, which is government.
  • Rusty Shackleford 2012/03/28 14:12:59
    Yes - I'll pay for my own heart transplant, like Cheney
    Rusty Shackleford
    I will pay for my own health care and will not accept 0bamacare.
  • Bastion Rusty S... 2012/03/28 14:17:48
    Bastion
    And anyone who can't should hurry up and die?
  • Rusty S... Bastion 2012/03/28 14:19:59
    Rusty Shackleford
    +2
    The government should not take my property to pay for your healthcare.

    If you are unable or unwilling to pay for it, why should the government force me to pay for the services you receive?
  • Bastion Rusty S... 2012/03/28 14:23:40
    Bastion
    +1
    The government takes MY property to pay for wars I assume you support.

    Do you have health insurance? You pay for other people's healthcare with your premiums.

    The government takes my property to pay for roads you drive on.
  • Rusty S... Bastion 2012/03/28 14:30:07
    Rusty Shackleford
    The defense of our country and roads are for everyone's use. Taking my property and giving it to you for your personal use is a violation of my rights.

    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/23 16:34:57

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals