Jump to content
Mayhem Requiem
politics

Obamacare upheld in Supreme Court


Woolfsmck

Featured Posts

Woolfsmck

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/supreme-court-upholds-obamacare-subsidies-122340028541.html

This is good for the hospitals and d--g companies who supply pharmaceuticals for the healthcare industry

Doesn't help with the rising insurance costs tho.

like a cat in a sil, I observe life, moving and still. My words give a clue,look inside to see whats true
Link to post
Share on other sites

Morphine Prince

Can't say I'm surprised. Just gonna bite my tongue on this issue. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pablo

this is all so confusing, I don't want to become an adult and have to think about this :saladga:

Don't visit my profile
Link to post
Share on other sites

ItsTommyBitch

Lemme be the first to say "finally" :green: The subsidies were only problematic because certain people refuse to use ObamaCare to its fullest imo tbh :smh: Regardless of how those people feel, millions of people have healthcare that didn't previously, and that's a good thing no matter how we slice it.

私自身もこの世の中も誰もかれもが, どんなに華やかな人生でも, どんなに悲惨な人生でも, いつかは変貌し, 破壊され、消滅してしまう. すべてがもともとこの世に存在しない一瞬の幻想なのだから
Link to post
Share on other sites

Woolfsmck

At least people with medical conditions can't get turned down now. Right?

Yes

like a cat in a sil, I observe life, moving and still. My words give a clue,look inside to see whats true
Link to post
Share on other sites

TiphEret

I don't understand

Sur le sable sur la neige, Sur les images dorées,Sur le front de mes amis, J’écris ton nom
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whispering

Good! I know of friends and family members who are benefitting from having available and affordable health care. We had millions of Americans who weren't able to afford healthcare, despite the fact that they were working and paying taxes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Woolfsmck

I don't understand

What part.?  Lawyers *for the right wing* brought issue with the funding for parts of the Affordable Care Act thru the Supreme Court.  The court just ruled that it was legal to do so.

like a cat in a sil, I observe life, moving and still. My words give a clue,look inside to see whats true
Link to post
Share on other sites

TiphEret

What part.?  Lawyers *for the right wing* brought issue with the funding for parts of the Affordable Care Act thru the Supreme Court.  The court just ruled that it was legal to do so.

I just don't understand the funding system and what was brought to court. 

Sur le sable sur la neige, Sur les images dorées,Sur le front de mes amis, J’écris ton nom
Link to post
Share on other sites

ItsTommyBitch

I just don't understand the funding system and what was brought to court. 

Subsidies were being charged @ to the states that chose not to establish a plan for their state (in order to urge them to actually do it :emma: ) They were arguing whether or not a provision that was meant to encourage/persuade the states into following the act were constitutional (someone tell me if that's incorrect) If I had to summarize the ruling, I'd say Supreme Court ruled yes they are constitution as we must assume a law whos intent was to help the healthcare industry is not responsible for hurting it. Take that how you may and with a grain of salt :pray: 

 

私自身もこの世の中も誰もかれもが, どんなに華やかな人生でも, どんなに悲惨な人生でも, いつかは変貌し, 破壊され、消滅してしまう. すべてがもともとこの世に存在しない一瞬の幻想なのだから
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whispering

1. The ACA Is providing affordable healthcare for 16 million individuals who didn't have it before.

2. Millions of young adults from the ages of 18 to 26 have healthcare, due to being allowed to stay on their parents' insurance plan until they are 26. 

3. The ACA closes the donut whole in insurance plans for senior citizens, saving them an average 1600 dollars a year. 

4. 129 million Americans have a pre-existing health condition and the ACA covers citizens with these types of issues. 

:applause:

Link to post
Share on other sites

TiphEret

Subsidies were being charged @ to the states that chose not to establish a plan for their state (in order to urge them to actually do it :emma: ) They were arguing whether or not a provision that was meant to encourage/persuade the states into following the act were constitutional (someone tell me if that's incorrect) If I had to summarize the ruling, I'd say Supreme Court ruled yes they are constitution as we must assume a law whos intent was to help the healthcare industry is not responsible for hurting it. Take that how you may and with a grain of salt :pray: 

 

Ahhh I see. Well the health care system is so special in the US so of course it's gonna take some muscles to change it! thanks for the summary! 

Sur le sable sur la neige, Sur les images dorées,Sur le front de mes amis, J’écris ton nom
Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...