obamacare

Thanks for the quick reply 16kadams. ==My opponent's plan== Texas has built free public hospitals? Source? I searched "free public hospital Texas" and only found one thing on Snopes, which turned out to be true. Texas' Parkland Memorial Hospital (a private hospital) was able to have 70% of their clients be illegal immigrants by using a blend of Medicaid, State and local taxes. [1] But my opponent's claim is suspect. My opponent says his plan is "cheaper" because it is "paid locally." That makes no sense. If his plan costs $10 trillion over 20 years, it costs that amount, regardless if the $10 trillion is paid nationally or locally. However, the tax burden will be felt FAR heavier locally since states and localities have far less money than the federal government and states cannot deficit spend. States and localities are REALLY strapped for cash right now. According to Cato, state and local debt increased by 55% from 2000 to 2006. [2] I don't think ANY of the states would be happy with my opponent's plan. My opponent doesn't respond to my cost estimates, so he basically concedes that his plan costs at least 10 times as much as Obamacare, but achieves no cost savings. All he says is that interns don't need to be paid, but we're not allowed to use slave labor in this country anymore. Interns just went to medical school and have huge debts; they obviously need to get paid. Interns DO get paid now. [3] In addition, they are only interns for one year, and residents for two more after that. My opponent drops the CBO study that Obamacare pays for itself and more. So Obamacare costs nothing because it saves so much money that it pays for itself. It even adds $210 billion to the government coffers. His only conceivable refutation is "here read this link and watch this video." I continue trying to advise him that debate requires him to explain his arguments himself. I also just have to take a second to LOL. My opponent clearly hates the "socialization of medicine," yet his plan is to build free, government run hospitals throughout the country. That's far more reminiscent of how Communism would solve this problem than is Obamacare. It is also more reminiscent of single payer systems too. All of my opponent's "quality of care" arguments would obviously apply to his free government-run hospitals with slave-labor interns doing all the work. Sounds more like a "death factory" than a hospital. ==Reducing income taxes== The next component of my opponent's plan is to REDUCE income taxes in order to pay for the plan. His logic is that lower taxes leads to more job creation and thus more tax revenue, in the long term. This idea is based on the extremely discredited Laffer curve. Reagonimics (tax cuts) failed to generate jobs during both Reagan's time and George W. Bush's tenure as president. Even assuming that this widely discredited theory were true, my opponent's tax breaks still eliminate at least half of the government's revenue in the short term. With more than half of the government's revenue gone, the government would basically be forced to abolish the military, Social Security, and Medicare. ==Slavery== My opponent says interns would be "forced" to work at the public hospital for free. That's slavery. ==Cost savings== My opponent still does not refute my cost savings argument or the HHS study. I won't bore you by repeating them once again (I'll do so in round 5, under "voting issues"). But the two biggest effects are clearly from: the cap on industry profits and the uninsured no longer using the ER as free primary care. ==Gruber== Cool, thanks for the link. The 41% figure isn't in there. Guess that answers that question. ==$10 co-pays== My opponent presumes here that all of the uninsured will start getting breast cancer screenings, which are only recommended for WOMEN over FIFTY. I can't believe my opponent is haggling over TEN DOLLARS when his plan routinely gives away FIFTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLAR procedures for free. ==Age rating bands of 3:1== It's in the bill? Link? Source? I went to the entire bill at one point and hit control F and couldn't find it. And my opponent still doesn't answer my two KEY responses: states already require this AND according to national statistics, premiums for the elderly and the young ALREADY fall within this range. ==Fines== Obamacare fines are either $695 or 2.5% of family income, whichever is larger. My opponent asks "which is it?" The answer: WHICHEVER IS LARGER. Take 2.5% of your family's income: if that's less than $695, you pay $695 in fines; if that's more than $695, you pay the 2.5%. ==Bachmann== Lol. ==4 New arguments== Fun, more copy and pasting to refute. I urge my opponent to stop pasting new arguments from various sources and stick with refuting my arguments and extending the arguments he's already got. 1. Health savings accounts These are special accounts where people can save money, tax free, in case of a medical emergency. Given that the government is not taxing them, it makes sense to require that they stop using their health savings accounts to purchase non-prescription medicines like Nyquil and Tylenol. 2. 10% excise tax on tanning salons So? It's a progressive tax given that the poor don't go to tanning salons. A tan costs like 40 bucks. Are you really going to cry because now it's $44 for a tanning bed session. It's a GOOD tax anyway since tanning gives you skin cancer. According to international cancer researchers, tanning beds are as likely to give you cancer as arsenic or mustard gas. [4] Obamacare undoubtedly saves itself money by discouraging some people from using tanning beds. 3. Cadillac plans These are only the BEST plans that only the uber-wealthy can afford, with annual premiums of $30-40,000 plus. [5] 4. New taxes One of the things Obamacare did was raise the Medicare payroll tax. Why is this fair? Because the last three rounds of HUGE Medicare benefit increases (part B, C, and D) were all done WITHOUT raising this tax. If you get more benefits, you have to pay in more. In addition, my opponent's plan would have to increase taxes by even more than this, so I don't get why he's still arguing this point. [1] http://www.snopes.com... [2] http://www.cato.org... [3] http://forums.studentdoctor.net... [4] http://www.msnbc.msn.com... [5] http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org...