Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

GRAPH of the Day - Percentage Uninsured

+4
2seaoat
KarlRove
boards of FL
Sal
8 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Sal

Sal

GRAPH of the Day - Percentage Uninsured Gallup-Q12015-Uninsured-rate

REPEAL OBAMACARE!!!
GOP 2016

boards of FL

boards of FL

Can any republican voter come here, look at this graph, and then justify repealing the very policy that is responsible for what you see on the graph?

Let's hear it. Make your case.


_________________
I approve this message.

KarlRove

KarlRove

Forced insurance -of course the numbers will come down. Tyranny.

How many are actually using it though?

KarlRove

KarlRove

It's analogous to forcing people to buy guns if there ever was such a law. If it were required, the
Numbers of unarmed people would decrease as well.

boards of FL

boards of FL

KarlRove wrote:Forced insurance -of course the numbers will come down.  Tyranny.

How many are actually using it though?


I think "affordable" is the word you were looking for, not "forced". No one is required to purchase health insurance under the ACA. You can simply go without and pay the penalty. If this were forced, the uninsured rate would be 0%, but it isn't, because no one is "forced" to purchase insurance.

So that's it? You - KarlRove - feel that it would be good policy to repeal the ACA and then watch the rate of uninsured skyrocket again? How is that optimal? Can you elaborate on how we would be better off with more people uninsured, and more people going to the ER for access to healthcare?

Let's hear it.




_________________
I approve this message.

2seaoat



Society benefits when everybody who drives a vehicle has insurance. Society benefits when ALL citizens have insurance. Society benefits when employers pay a living wage and the taxpayers do not have to pay the difference in the form of medicaid health care costs, housing, and food stamps.

It is a privilege to get to drive a car or have the government provide payment where there is no insurance and a person has a medical emergency. Why can't taxpayers demand that those privileges entail responsibility. You need auto insurance to drive. You need health insurance to avoid the Government picking up the tab. You need employers paying living wages which eliminates a large portion of the government paid health cost and shifts the same onto private sector companies under the affordable care act. These issues are simply too complex for some folks.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

boards of FL wrote:
KarlRove wrote:Forced insurance -of course the numbers will come down.  Tyranny.

How many are actually using it though?


I think "affordable" is the word you were looking for, not "forced".  No one is required to purchase health insurance under the ACA.  You can simply go without and pay the penalty.  If this were forced, the uninsured rate would be 0%, but it isn't, because no one is "forced" to purchase insurance.

So that's it?  You - KarlRove - feel that it would be good policy to repeal the ACA and then watch the rate of uninsured skyrocket again?  How is that optimal?  Can you elaborate on how we would be better off with more people uninsured, and more people going to the ER for access to healthcare?

Let's hear it.





War Hero hates poor sick people.   Nuff said.

KarlRove

KarlRove

boards of FL wrote:
KarlRove wrote:Forced insurance -of course the numbers will come down.  Tyranny.

How many are actually using it though?


I think "affordable" is the word you were looking for, not "forced". No one is required to purchase health insurance under the ACA. You can simply go without and pay the penalty. If this were forced, the uninsured rate would be 0%, but it isn't, because no one is "forced" to purchase insurance.

So that's it? You - KarlRove - feel that it would be good policy to repeal the ACA and then watch the rate of uninsured skyrocket again? How is that optimal? Can you elaborate on how we would be better off with more people uninsured, and more people going to the ER for access to healthcare?

Let's hear it.




It is forced. It's stupid law. If you aren't wanting to buy a product and want to assume the risk, why does the government force you? Hmmmm

KarlRove

KarlRove

Wordslinger wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
KarlRove wrote:Forced insurance -of course the numbers will come down.  Tyranny.

How many are actually using it though?


I think "affordable" is the word you were looking for, not "forced".  No one is required to purchase health insurance under the ACA.  You can simply go without and pay the penalty.  If this were forced, the uninsured rate would be 0%, but it isn't, because no one is "forced" to purchase insurance.

So that's it?  You - KarlRove - feel that it would be good policy to repeal the ACA and then watch the rate of uninsured skyrocket again?  How is that optimal?  Can you elaborate on how we would be better off with more people uninsured, and more people going to the ER for access to healthcare?

Let's hear it.





War Hero hates poor sick people.   Nuff said.

so we were subsidizing the costs of the uninsured before....not we are being FORCED to subsidize everyone who can't afford the forced insurance the government makes them buy.

KarlRove

KarlRove

2seaoat wrote:Society benefits when everybody who drives a vehicle has insurance. Society benefits when ALL citizens have insurance. Society benefits when employers pay a living wage and the taxpayers do not have to pay the difference in the form of medicaid health care costs, housing, and food stamps.

It is a privilege to get to drive a car or have the government provide payment where there is no insurance and a person has a medical emergency. Why can't taxpayers demand that those privileges entail responsibility. You need auto insurance to drive. You need health insurance to avoid the Government picking up the tab. You need employers paying living wages which eliminates a large portion of the government paid health cost and shifts the same onto private sector companies under the affordable care act. These issues are simply too complex for some folks.

Piss poor analogy. You can choose to not buy a car.

There are jobs that do not rate to be paid more than minimum wage. You can choose to educate yourself and do better on your own, not through forced actions by the government.

You and the Democrats think that government is the answer to all problems. It is not. It creates more than it solves.

boards of FL

boards of FL

KarlRove wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
KarlRove wrote:Forced insurance -of course the numbers will come down.  Tyranny.

How many are actually using it though?


I think "affordable" is the word you were looking for, not "forced".  No one is required to purchase health insurance under the ACA.  You can simply go without and pay the penalty.  If this were forced, the uninsured rate would be 0%, but it isn't, because no one is "forced" to purchase insurance.

So that's it?  You - KarlRove - feel that it would be good policy to repeal the ACA and then watch the rate of uninsured skyrocket again?  How is that optimal?  Can you elaborate on how we would be better off with more people uninsured, and more people going to the ER for access to healthcare?

Let's hear it.




It is forced. It's stupid law. If you aren't wanting to buy a product and want to assume the risk, why does the government force you? Hmmmm


You are objectively wrong, but for the sake of humoring you lets assume for a second that the ACA forces everyone to buy health insurance.  

Why isn't the rate of uninsured 0%?

Your "low information voter" status is showing, Karl.


_________________
I approve this message.

Markle

Markle

boards of FL wrote:
KarlRove wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
KarlRove wrote:Forced insurance -of course the numbers will come down.  Tyranny.

How many are actually using it though?


I think "affordable" is the word you were looking for, not "forced".  No one is required to purchase health insurance under the ACA.  You can simply go without and pay the penalty.  If this were forced, the uninsured rate would be 0%, but it isn't, because no one is "forced" to purchase insurance.

So that's it?  You - KarlRove - feel that it would be good policy to repeal the ACA and then watch the rate of uninsured skyrocket again?  How is that optimal?  Can you elaborate on how we would be better off with more people uninsured, and more people going to the ER for access to healthcare?

Let's hear it.




It is forced. It's stupid law. If you aren't wanting to buy a product and want to assume the risk, why does the government force you? Hmmmm

You are objectively wrong, but for the sake of humoring you lets assume for a second that the ACA forces everyone to buy health insurance.  

Why isn't the rate of uninsured 0%?  

Your "low information voter" status is showing, Karl.

For the same reason people speed, rob banks and drive without insurance.

Many of those who have been forced to buy insurance cannot afford to use the insurance.

2seaoat



The principles of the ACA started with the Heritage Foundation, Romneycare, and Obamacare......as soon as the black guy succeeded with the ACA, it became a problem. It is a huge success, but also not perfect. We can make improvements on our path to medicare for all.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Markle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
KarlRove wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
KarlRove wrote:Forced insurance -of course the numbers will come down.  Tyranny.

How many are actually using it though?


I think "affordable" is the word you were looking for, not "forced".  No one is required to purchase health insurance under the ACA.  You can simply go without and pay the penalty.  If this were forced, the uninsured rate would be 0%, but it isn't, because no one is "forced" to purchase insurance.

So that's it?  You - KarlRove - feel that it would be good policy to repeal the ACA and then watch the rate of uninsured skyrocket again?  How is that optimal?  Can you elaborate on how we would be better off with more people uninsured, and more people going to the ER for access to healthcare?

Let's hear it.




It is forced. It's stupid law. If you aren't wanting to buy a product and want to assume the risk, why does the government force you? Hmmmm

You are objectively wrong, but for the sake of humoring you lets assume for a second that the ACA forces everyone to buy health insurance.  

Why isn't the rate of uninsured 0%?  

Your "low information voter" status is showing, Karl.

For the same reason people speed, rob banks and drive without insurance.

Many of those who have been forced to buy insurance cannot afford to use the insurance.  


Perhaps I need to rephrase. KarlRove is making the claim that insurance coverage is required of everyone. He's objectively wrong. We can all choose to purchase insurance or not. If we choose to not purchase insurance, we will then pay a penalty.

Speeding is illegal. Robing banks is illegal. Driving without insurance is illegal.

Not having health insurance is not illegal. Why? Because we aren't legally required to have health insurance. That is why 11% of the population does not have health insurance. You understand this, right?


_________________
I approve this message.

KarlRove

KarlRove

boards of FL wrote:
Markle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
KarlRove wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
KarlRove wrote:Forced insurance -of course the numbers will come down.  Tyranny.

How many are actually using it though?


I think "affordable" is the word you were looking for, not "forced".  No one is required to purchase health insurance under the ACA.  You can simply go without and pay the penalty.  If this were forced, the uninsured rate would be 0%, but it isn't, because no one is "forced" to purchase insurance.

So that's it?  You - KarlRove - feel that it would be good policy to repeal the ACA and then watch the rate of uninsured skyrocket again?  How is that optimal?  Can you elaborate on how we would be better off with more people uninsured, and more people going to the ER for access to healthcare?

Let's hear it.




It is forced. It's stupid law. If you aren't wanting to buy a product and want to assume the risk, why does the government force you? Hmmmm

You are objectively wrong, but for the sake of humoring you lets assume for a second that the ACA forces everyone to buy health insurance.  

Why isn't the rate of uninsured 0%?  

Your "low information voter" status is showing, Karl.

For the same reason people speed, rob banks and drive without insurance.

Many of those who have been forced to buy insurance cannot afford to use the insurance.  


Perhaps I need to rephrase. KarlRove is making the claim that insurance coverage is required of everyone. He's objectively wrong. We can all choose to purchase insurance or not. If we choose to not purchase insurance, we will then pay a penalty.

Speeding is illegal. Robing banks is illegal. Driving without insurance is illegal.

Not having health insurance is not illegal. Why? Because we aren't legally required to have health insurance. That is why 11% of the population does not have health insurance. You understand this, right?

if it wasn't illegal, then why is there a fine? nuf said. Put a cork in it.

2seaoat



if it wasn't illegal, then why is there a fine? nuf said. Put a cork in it.


Oh Oh.....Pace giving an opinion on what is legal.....so I took an early withdrawal from my IRA before I was 59 1/2 and paid a penalty of 10% and now I am a criminal......your cork long ago got lost.....so it keeps on spewing....and spewing.....and spewing and there is never nuf said.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

2seaoat wrote:if it wasn't illegal, then why is there a fine? nuf said. Put a cork in it.


Oh Oh.....Pace giving an opinion on what is legal.....so I took an early withdrawal from my IRA before I was 59 1/2 and paid a penalty of 10% and now I am a criminal......your cork long ago got lost.....so it keeps on spewing....and spewing.....and spewing and there is never nuf said.


I can only imagine how he will transfer his hate from President Obama to our first female president.......
Razz

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Markle

Markle

boards of FL wrote:
Markle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
KarlRove wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
KarlRove wrote:Forced insurance -of course the numbers will come down.  Tyranny.

How many are actually using it though?


I think "affordable" is the word you were looking for, not "forced".  No one is required to purchase health insurance under the ACA.  You can simply go without and pay the penalty.  If this were forced, the uninsured rate would be 0%, but it isn't, because no one is "forced" to purchase insurance.

So that's it?  You - KarlRove - feel that it would be good policy to repeal the ACA and then watch the rate of uninsured skyrocket again?  How is that optimal?  Can you elaborate on how we would be better off with more people uninsured, and more people going to the ER for access to healthcare?

Let's hear it.




It is forced. It's stupid law. If you aren't wanting to buy a product and want to assume the risk, why does the government force you? Hmmmm

You are objectively wrong, but for the sake of humoring you lets assume for a second that the ACA forces everyone to buy health insurance.  

Why isn't the rate of uninsured 0%?  

Your "low information voter" status is showing, Karl.

For the same reason people speed, rob banks and drive without insurance.

Many of those who have been forced to buy insurance cannot afford to use the insurance.  


Perhaps I need to rephrase.  KarlRove is making the claim that insurance coverage is required of everyone.  He's objectively wrong.  We can all choose to purchase insurance or not.  If we choose to not purchase insurance, we will then pay a penalty.

Speeding is illegal.  Robing banks is illegal.  Driving without insurance is illegal.  

Not having health insurance is not illegal.  Why?  Because we aren't legally required to have health insurance.  That is why 11% of the population does not have health insurance.  You understand this, right?  

Not having health insurance is most certainly illegal. If you cannot prove that you have health insurance. You pay a fine. The fine will be higher next year and higher the following year.

boards of FL

boards of FL

KarlRove wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
Markle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
KarlRove wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
KarlRove wrote:Forced insurance -of course the numbers will come down.  Tyranny.

How many are actually using it though?


I think "affordable" is the word you were looking for, not "forced".  No one is required to purchase health insurance under the ACA.  You can simply go without and pay the penalty.  If this were forced, the uninsured rate would be 0%, but it isn't, because no one is "forced" to purchase insurance.

So that's it?  You - KarlRove - feel that it would be good policy to repeal the ACA and then watch the rate of uninsured skyrocket again?  How is that optimal?  Can you elaborate on how we would be better off with more people uninsured, and more people going to the ER for access to healthcare?

Let's hear it.




It is forced. It's stupid law. If you aren't wanting to buy a product and want to assume the risk, why does the government force you? Hmmmm

You are objectively wrong, but for the sake of humoring you lets assume for a second that the ACA forces everyone to buy health insurance.  

Why isn't the rate of uninsured 0%?  

Your "low information voter" status is showing, Karl.

For the same reason people speed, rob banks and drive without insurance.

Many of those who have been forced to buy insurance cannot afford to use the insurance.  


Perhaps I need to rephrase.  KarlRove is making the claim that insurance coverage is required of everyone.  He's objectively wrong.  We can all choose to purchase insurance or not.  If we choose to not purchase insurance, we will then pay a penalty.

Speeding is illegal.  Robing banks is illegal.  Driving without insurance is illegal.  

Not having health insurance is not illegal.  Why?  Because we aren't legally required to have health insurance.  That is why 11% of the population does not have health insurance.  You understand this, right?  

if it wasn't illegal, then why is there a fine? nuf said. Put a cork in it.


Look, everyone. It's a low information voter.



_________________
I approve this message.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Markle wrote:Not having health insurance is most certainly illegal.


And yet another low information voter!


_________________
I approve this message.

nadalfan



boards of FL wrote:
Markle wrote:Not having health insurance is most certainly illegal.


And yet another low information voter!

I'm getting the impression that it's more like NO information voter

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum