Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: In The Philadelphia Inquirer is an 'article' called 'Obamacare: A bad deal for young people' [View all]solarhydrocan
(551 posts)18. Yes it was
The health insurance mandate in the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is an idea hatched in 1989 by Stuart M. Butler at Heritage in a publication titled "Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans".[21] This was also the model for Mitt Romney's health care plan in Massachusetts.[22]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritage_foundation#Policy_influence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritage_foundation#Policy_influence
Here's the original paper by Stewart Butler, Heritage foundation.
Notice how they used the Auto insurance argument so popular with third way "liberals"
Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans
2) Mandate all households to obtain adequate insurance. Many states now require passengers in automobiles to wear seatbelts for their own protection. Many others require anybody driving a car to have li a bility insurance.
But neither the federal government nor any state requires all households to protect themselves from the potentially catastrophic costs of a serious accident or illness. Under the Heritage plan, there would be such a requirement. This man d ate is based on two important principles.
First, that health care protection is a responsibility of individuals, not businesses. Thus to the extent that anybody should be required to provide coverage to a family, the household mandate assumes that it is the family that carries the first responsibility. Second, it assumes that there is an implicit contract between households and society, based on the notion that health insurance is not like other forms of insurance protection.
If a young man wrecks his Porsche and has not had the foresight to obtain insurance, we may commiserate but society feels no obligation to repair his car. But health care is different. If a man is struck down by a heart attack in the street, Americans will care for him whether or not h e has insurance. If we find that he has spent his money on other things rather than insurance, we may be angry but we will not deny him services - even if that means more prudent citizens end up paying the tab.
http://www.heritage.org/research/lecture/assuring-affordable-health-care-for-all-americans
But neither the federal government nor any state requires all households to protect themselves from the potentially catastrophic costs of a serious accident or illness. Under the Heritage plan, there would be such a requirement. This man d ate is based on two important principles.
First, that health care protection is a responsibility of individuals, not businesses. Thus to the extent that anybody should be required to provide coverage to a family, the household mandate assumes that it is the family that carries the first responsibility. Second, it assumes that there is an implicit contract between households and society, based on the notion that health insurance is not like other forms of insurance protection.
If a young man wrecks his Porsche and has not had the foresight to obtain insurance, we may commiserate but society feels no obligation to repair his car. But health care is different. If a man is struck down by a heart attack in the street, Americans will care for him whether or not h e has insurance. If we find that he has spent his money on other things rather than insurance, we may be angry but we will not deny him services - even if that means more prudent citizens end up paying the tab.
http://www.heritage.org/research/lecture/assuring-affordable-health-care-for-all-americans
Why is anyone surprised? Obama told us all his policies are republican ones from the 80's
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
36 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
In The Philadelphia Inquirer is an 'article' called 'Obamacare: A bad deal for young people' [View all]
onehandle
Dec 2013
OP
As I said, it's not, but that's okay. I am not interested in debating the self-evident. nt
Demo_Chris
Dec 2013
#24
Not with a progressive income tax it wouldn't, since older workers are wealthier, and earn more.
Romulox
Dec 2013
#15
That's paying for the subsidy/tax credit side of things. The other larger half...
Demo_Chris
Dec 2013
#27
Was that after Krugman recently explained his support for the Trans Pacific Partnership?
Romulox
Dec 2013
#21
Nonsense. Obamacare ("Romneycare") is *also* from the Heritage Foundation. YOU agree with them. nt
Romulox
Dec 2013
#28
Yes, and almost exactly in the form it was enacted--e.g. no drug reimportation, no public option. nt
Romulox
Dec 2013
#20