This is why I hate ObamaCare

[tim-from-pa]

[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]If you read the article link I have, it says who will pay for this care. I will only comment on the first two categories, and then you can read the rest and see similar themes:[/FONT]

[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]The 2%:[/FONT]

[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]The message: “It's your fault you are rich! It's not enough you pay proportionally more taxes, but dish out to the rest of us!†thus totally forgetting this is America and everyone has a right to the American Dream. It's not the rich person's fault that the rest are considered by themselves failures (perhaps their own fault) and did not achieve the American Dream for whatever imagined impediment they have.[/FONT]

[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]Artificial Sun Worshipers:[/FONT]

[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]The message: “We say you are engaging in risky behavior, why should we pay for the ill health we say you are going to get? Dish out more!†despite the fact that these healthy people engaging in such so-called risky behavior have to dish out to the unhealthy ones (who think they are healthier) and viewing them as the problem instead of the solution. You'll find that ObamaCare will call other healthy habits "risky" and actually support the junk nutritional and health "science" that's basically killing people these days. People on tanning beds are not the problem.[/FONT]

[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]And on and on it goes....... totally messed up in the brain.[/FONT]

[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]Here's the link:[/FONT]
[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Obamacare-taxes-tanners-rich/2012/08/09/id/448097[/FONT]

 

[reba]

Cant be the fault of the 2% they did not get there by them selves :p

 

[jasoncran]

lol. i have yet to read the link, but i do want to say this.

if your lifestyle causes risks then why not charge for it and i mean well that right to love anyone deal. oh but that wouldnt be right. lets ignore the data and lets have all other americans pay for me.

 

[tim-from-pa]

lol. i have yet to read the link, but i do want to say this.

if your lifestyle causes risks then why not charge for it and i mean well that right to love anyone deal. oh but that wouldnt be right. lets ignore the data and lets have all other americans pay for me.

Remember that time I said in another post I don't trust medical statistics and came up with blatant examples that contradicted each other? I was being sarcastic, because I don't believe tanning beds really cause a significant increase in cancer. As a matter of fact, the so-called "healthy" diet that Michele Obamam and other healthoholic cronies of theirs push causes far more harm than a tanning bed, but I suppose that's "OK". This is a clear case of discrimination.

I'll wager a bet. If I was smart I'd bet my entire retirement account double or nothing. If big Pharma and other special interests could cash in on tanning beds, or for that matter the sun (if they could), then I guarantee you they would claim that stuff is very healthy for you. It's not about statistics. Bogus statistics are simply used to dupe the people to convince them of their political agenda.

 

[jasoncran]

im not fully in your camp yet. but i do see the point with cancerous causing sunscreen. intentional no but ironic. i burn and i am yet risk for cancer real easily. so i avoid overexposure but i work outside a lot.

i got burned by my seat belt buckle thursday. the major problem i have with modern mecidine is that i can easily be corrupted by conflicting interests. drugs that shouldnt be on the shelves are and the side effects are well known and it take a couple of deaths to stop that.