Obamacare: why is it bad?

Redpill me on Obamacare and why is it bad?

Other urls found in this thread:

tennessean.com/story/money/2016/09/26/bcbst-pull-out-obamacare-exchange-nashville-knoxville-and-memphis/90742822/
forbes.com/sites/mikemyatt/2011/11/15/self-made-man-no-such-thing/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night-watchman_state
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Taking money from those who can already afford their own health care to forcibly give inefficient and low quality health care to people who don't pay into the system.

This also puts private enterprise in competition with the government which isn't a good thing.

its not bad.

It being bad is a meme. Premiums have risen, but less than they would have risen without it. Greedy biotech companies and insurers are to blame for the premium rises.

HIllary actually wanted to impose restrictions lowering the prices of drugs.

Case in point, biotech sector on wallstreet is up 9% today. Expect much higher medical expenses without obongo and killary.

as I understand it,

People were told:
their premiums wouldn't go up
they could keep their current plans
they could keep their doctor

and none of it was true

>Taking money from those who can already afford their own health care to forcibly give inefficient and low quality health care to people who don't pay into the system.

yeah because those poor motherfuckers don't deserve to live anyway because they're born poor

cunt

You're asking insurance companies to sell fire insurance to a man whose house is on fire.

You're asking me to pay thousands of dollars to NOT have healthcare, so that they take MY money and buy ILLEGAL ALIENS healthcare.

You're asking doctors to take a 70% pay cut.

You're giving away free healthcare to illegal aliens (see above).

You seem like a rational and levelheaded person who is capable of having a reasonable discussion with someone who has a different opinion.

child

because a nigger proposed it.

Not an argument.
No joke, this is not an argument.

$6000 deductible

>Taking money from those who can already afford their own health care to forcibly give inefficient and low quality health care to people who don't pay into the system.
>This also puts private enterprise in competition with the government which isn't a good thing.

None of this is true, though. This is why non-Americans shouldn't talk about US politics.

>Premiums have risen, but less than they would have risen without it.

But this isn't true either. No, insurance premiums don't go up 20% a year here in the US.

And that "drug prices went up!" has nothing to do with Obamacare. It has no pharmaceutical cost controls.

Seriously, fucking Europeans don't know shit whatever side of the argument they're on.

>why is a bill that does nothing to stabilize insurance and medical costs bad?

>why is a bill that forces everyone to buy health insurance bad?

To reply to myself, Obamacare was shit because:

>it forced people to buy a private product, which (despite what 5 Supreme Court justices say) is unconstitutional
>forcing insurance companies to put people with preexisting conditions on their plans resulted in dramatically raised rates
>most of the plans that people without group coverage were forced to buy were high deductible garbage
>poor people were already covered by Medicaid (and elderly / disabled people by Medicare) so pretending this helped them is bullshit

I fail to see how the ACA helped anyone, with the possible exception of unemployed twentysomethings

The first Brit poster is entirely correct fuckface

The kikes in the drug industry were over charging the goyim for medical care and ripping them off in many cases and Obama fixed the problem as much as the industry-owned congress would let him

>None of this is true, though
My record has been corrected

Can confirm. I lost my employer provided health insurance because of the ACA. It was replaced with a lesser plan so my employer didn't have to pay the Cadillac tax. The Cadillac tax is 40% of what the employer pays for these plans if they pay over $10,000.

I had an awesome plan. Now it's gone.

fucking commies

I would have to pay $350/month to have a $5,000 deductible. So if I get hurt I have to pay $350 for the month plus up to $5,000 before insurance kicks in.

And that's if they decide im worth it! I would have to call or skype a doctor and talk to him that way before I can get an appointment.

Next year it will be $6500/per person per year. I have a family of 3 to pay for. I have to come up with $19,500 a year just for health insurance. If someone gets sick go ahead and add up to $5,000 to that because all that insurance money doesn't do dick until then.

Obama care isn't good think.
In America with all this health corporations is impossible to achieve good health care.
You facing total earthquake and closing down all this insurance corporations throwing many people working for them out of work.
Or doing Semi Universal healthcare as Obama did when rest need to chip out and big corps will find way to get even more to them selves.
Only way will be creating a national insurer for all those who cant aford insurance based healthcare and pay for it from taxes, then more people will drop from private insurers, but you facing other problems all hospitals and corporations making drugs can lift prices, and the system will cost you billions, you need to build national hospitals and pharmacy factory's to have decent prices, and that's will cost again.

I'm 18 with no income and I'd have to pay $206 a month and a $7000 deductible on the cheapest plan in my state of FL, are they nuts?

Apologies, I'm still upset of the recent elections. If only Sanders won the primaries....

Still, that doesn't invalidate my point.

Let me translate this to simple english:
I AM A SELFISH AMERICAN WHO DOESN'T GIVE A SINGLE FUCK OF OTHERS WHO ARE IN NEED ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO CAN'T AFFORD HEALTHCARE!!

Wow.

I hope you have no relatives/people who you hold dear that are born poor.

i don't know

but the idea that I have is that it's obviously good for poor people because it expanded the amount of people who can get covered by medicaid

But it's also been bad for most of the middle class who have seen increases in their premiums, those who don't have a group plan from their employer or are self-employed are forced to buy really expensive insurance or pay a fine

do I have that right?

Yeah, it really isn't. People are blind.

His biggest mistakes will be not repelling Bushes presidential powers. Huge fuckeup in view of his successor not being from his own stock.

Then Syria. Ukraine. Shoulda stayed out of the first and go for ISIS first. Shoulda send his troops to Ukraine, call the bluff, threat with airpower, thing would be ended by now.

Then as the biggest one that will haunt his legacy. Dronestrikes. They will be on his tombstone. Read Dirty Wars. It's written by a total liberal, and it's as damaging to him as it's to Bush. Media don't write histories, historians when they get the chance do, they will write them on his tombstone, and it won't look pretty.

Retarded people voted for Obama thinking Obamacare would be free. It was not.

Why are Filipinos always temperamental and irrational?

out of the topic, also read

tennessean.com/story/money/2016/09/26/bcbst-pull-out-obamacare-exchange-nashville-knoxville-and-memphis/90742822/

Being born poor , and choosing to be poor are 2 different things dude.

for most it isn't health care, it is just insurance

it is mandatory catastrophic health liability insurance

so if you get really sick you're still fucked financially, but the hospital doesn't get stuck with all of it

I's being bad is not a meme. It is bad because all that it does is mandate that every person buy healthcare from a private company or be fined a certain amount. We could have gotten universal healthcare, or a public option, but because the democrats(and republicans) are beholden to corporations we got what is essentially a mandate that every citizen must pay for healthcare.

You're still missing the deductible problem. For most of the newly insured with 5k+ deductibles, they've gained very little to no coverage at the cost of hundreds a month.

>their premiums wouldn't go up

I bought insurance via the Obamacare website last year because it was the first year where the amount I would pay for insurance was roughly the same as the tax penalty I would face for not having it. Had it for a year, never used it in any meaningful way, and got a letter a couple weeks ago informing me that my premiums would increase by 50% if I choose to keep the same insurance for the coming year.

>I AM A SELFISH AMERICAN WHO DOESN'T GIVE A SINGLE FUCK OF OTHERS WHO ARE IN NEED ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO CAN'T AFFORD HEALTHCARE!!
There's nothing wrong with that mindset.
People are not entitled to healthcare for any reason.

They wrote in state lines which insures companies can't compete in certain areas. This means some companies have monopolies over certain areas. If everyone was allowed to compete everywhere, better plans would be available in order for companies to be more competitive to one another.

I'm in union so Obamacare doesn't effect me.

It doesn't work. Americans have paid more for their healthcare than most other countries and it provides the least care, or no care at all.

It also cost 6.5 billion dollars and several years to make a website for Obamacare, and it didn't work on delivery. It still didn't work after months of trying to fix it.

America sent rockets into outerspace and nearly to the moon for as much money. I don't care who the fuck you are or what your obstacles are. If you have 6.5 billion dollars and literal years to make a single god-damn-fucking website, you'd better damn well succeed. Most private companies could have done it successfully with half the budget on time.

That alone is a failure. Not to mention the legislation involved in Obamacare is hideously complex.

I'm from the Philippines. I was born with relative privilege compared to the majority of the people here in our country.

My grandfather was a security guard, while my grandmother sold rice cakes at the public market. My mom had 3 siblings, and all of them had to stop going to high school and none even entered college because they needed to work just to feed their mouths.

Now tell me, how is being poor a choice and not a product of circumstances?

I'm really depressed that people still has mindsets that healthcare is not a necessity in one's life.
>Russia
Oh wait...

government decreases supply with regulations. government increases demand by making it "free". Decrease in supply + increase in demand = higher prices. Legislation can't make more medical resources (doctors, hospitals, supplies) fall out of the sky. The laws of economics also apply to the medical industry FWIW

You know that wasn't an argument right. Thank God your President will kill sad little cucks like you in due time.

Obamacare is shit

>less than they would have risen without it.
hahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhaahahhahahahahahahahhahahah come on ctr

If everyone's curious how the story ended: My mom met my dad who's smart as fuck that he got a scholarship at LSE.

>You know that wasn't an argument right.
Which part?
>Thank God your President will kill sad little cucks like you in due time.
Soon, hopefully. I don't see essence living in this world with what's happening around me.

Healthcare is a necessity.
You are not entitled to it.
You have to work for it.
If you can't afford it you don't deserve it just like you don't deserve to eat if you don't work for it.

And you sure as fuck don't deserve healthcare at the expense of anyone else paying for it.
This is not a fairy wonderland.

>Russia
Yes, Russia, a country with a history of socialism and socialized health care. Fuck you.

Short story: the government interfering in the market is bad.

Why would the government setting what insurance products can be, and where they can be sold, help people who need insurance? Whenever you hear explanations of how the state-controlled exchanges, imagine what would happen if we were talking about food or other good sellers instead of insurance providers.

I had to pay a $2500 fine for not wanting healthcare. How is that legal?

IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IFIF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IFIF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF

It was an argument you dumbfuck American. Whether or not healthcare should be free at the point of delivery is essentially a moral question. Most people would say that it should be, because the world is inherently unjust.

You burgers are like human pieces of shit. Can't wait for Trump to finally tank your pathetic little society.

>Short story: the government interfering in the market is bad.

Lol. The president can't even negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical companies. The US has a virtually unregulated healthcare system. That's why if you break your arm you can go bankrupt, while in real countries it would be free or virtually free to have it treated. Why you burgers persist with constantly disproven theories about free markets baffles me.

>Now tell me, how is being poor a choice and not a product of circumstances?
Are you telling us that people have no control over their lives and that it's just "meant to be" for them to be poor and miserable?

Most modern capitalist societies have very low social mobility. They're also not meritocratic.

i dont know but since it went into effect i now pay $240 / month for the same plan ive had since like 06 when it was less than 80 / month.

i probably havent been to the doctor in at least 5 years anyway why the fuck am i paying this money again??

Being fined for not having health care.

>The US has a virtually unregulated healthcare system
OK, man. You know what it would take to set up a new hospital or how many hoops you have to jump through to be a doctor or how many government approvals medicine has to go through?

How do you explain the price of the EpiPen in the US except for a government-approved monopoly from protectionist "regulation"?

Also
>free money

Go study your introduction to policy class
Roles of the state
>Defend the state from invasions
>Make a society that is just and equal
>PROVIDE NECESSITIES THAT ARE ESSENTIAL TO THE PEOPLE
>so much more

No, what I'm telling you that some individuals are lucky enough to go and climb the social ladder while some can't because they're pushed back in the corner and all they can do is try at least to feed themselves.

If mom didn't meet my dad, chances are she's still living in a house made of cardboard near the canal.

Check this out, user: forbes.com/sites/mikemyatt/2011/11/15/self-made-man-no-such-thing/

Does Australia not provide government incentives/grants/scholarships to lower-income grade school students for college?

>They're also not meritocratic.
Sure, if your definition of failure is: not becoming filthy, obscenely rich

No. Roles of the state:
Protect liberty. Common defense and negative liberties (things the government can't take from you) are how to do it. Taking property from half the population to give the rest of the population a cellphone or a doctor's visit is not protect people's freedom of choice

My healthcare raised a $100 a month. Thats why

>>forcing insurance companies to put people with preexisting conditions on their plans resulted in dramatically raised rates

I think the main problem for us europeans to understand is the following:

how can you have a system, where basic health care is not provided by everyone living in your country(and i mean not just the ERs, but also preventative care)? This concept is a bit alien to us, because (traditionally) we in a country are all of one people and thus feel as comunity, no-one should go sick, becuase he cannot afford health care.
So if you are giving free basic health care, you need to equalize the burden of the not-paying on all others equally. this led to many euro countries having a more or less national health insurance system, like the NHS or our public health insurers.
It seems to me, that your problem is, that either

a) you don't want everyone to have basic coverage
b) your system doesn't shoulder the burden equally amongst all insured.

is that correct?

Let's say you made widgets.

No one really needed these widgets, but where they were helpful, they were life savers.

You don't really make too much cash, but you're getting by.

One day the government mandates that everyone must buy these widgets. For purposes we'll say that they expire, so everyone has to buy these things every single month, to say nothing about how many more they will need to buy whenever they happen to have a use for them.

Suddenly literally everyone is a customer. Even if demand was never an issue, there's no reason you can't charge whatever the fuck you want, because people buy or they suffer the penalty - so your ONLY limitation is in staying below that penalty. As the years go on, the penalty goes up. So too does your price.

I'm sure you can see how this could be incredible for widget makers.

You know how fucking fat americans are?
You want me to pay for their healthcare?

That's the case in all first world countries. Healthcare legislation needs to be tight due to the nature of the field. Medicines can be risky, doctors need to be well educated etc.

The prices are unregulated. That the epipen price has gone up massively and the government can't do shit about it is testament to how much power corporations have in the US. Other companies can come up with an adrenaline autoinjector. Too bad they can't compete with the epipens corporate power.

The US healthcare system is an international scandal. Why you don't just get universal healthcare is baffling to everyone else.

you cant do free/cheap healthcare for 300 million people. you can do it in canada and in european countries but not in america.

too many niggers, too much abuse

Yes, but there is still plenty of inequality (although not nearly to the extent of the US). You will likely die poor if you are born poor.

The role of the state is debatable. Of course you're in favour of a government whose only role is essentially to enforce inequalities and protect the rich. You already have that in the US, and it's a shithole.

Is congress or any government allowed to tell medical companies to stop raising their prices so high? Seeing the price jump of epipen was ridiculous, was there a reason for it or just greed?

this

Any company that wants to compete in an area MUST TAKE PEOPLE WITH PREVIOUS CONDITIONS.

So if you have an illness which requires huge expenses every year - those wanting to compete cannot deny you.

This pushes up the price they charge of the entire class and pool of Obamacare insured.

There are illnesses requiring hundreds of thousands or millions in costs per year. You need a LOT of healthy paying people to weigh up for this. Obamacare just didn't get enough healthy people and too many unhealthy people.

It forces companies to supply their employees with healthcare if they have a certain amount of employees. Caused a lot of layoffs.

Are you an academic debater user? You give that sort of vibe.

Monash, perhaps?

>One day the government mandates that everyone must buy these widgets
I thought there are plans/packages when registering for Obamacare? Just opt in for the cheapest one.

>Other companies can come up with an adrenaline autoinjector. Too bad they can't compete with the epipens corporate power.
What the fuck are you talking about "the epipens corporate power?" It's the government's that has banned every alternative that is on the market in European countries, not Mylan buying out every competitor. The only thing that's prevent the prices from being better is the government

How "risky" must something be for the government to regulate it for you? You say medicines can be risky, does that mean that the government should regulate only new drugs, and leave aspirin alone? What about supplements? What if I wanted to sell zinc or magnesium tablets?

How does not taking things from people using coercion enforcing inequalities or protecting the rich?

you know how fucking stupid a lot of people are?
you want to pay for their schooling?

you know how many americans build fucking match-stick wooden houses?
you want to pay for the on average larger fire-dapartments?

I know where you are comming from, but where do you draw the line? what basic need should not be covered because of income/life-style choices...?

>Can't afford insurance
>Obamacare passes
>Still can't afford insurance but now you have to pay a fine for not being able to afford insurance

because the republicans made it unusable

/thread

>Dems control house, Senate and pres
>Republicans fucked it up

How?

Have you not heard of the Nightwatchman state or minarchism?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night-watchman_state

I don't know what Nozick's essentials were, but I believe it was just the court system, police and military.

Education can be done private. People who go to public school now still use non-publicly funded things like Khan Academy or resources from private schools like MIT's courses. There's also some private fire department counties, where people can choose to buy their services before their house burns, or they can keep their money if they decide the risk isn't great enough for the costs.

This is the problem with capitalism. Mylan is only interested in maximising its profits, not satisfying human need. The fault is not squarely with the government, whose role is to protect the interests of the wealthy. The collusion is the problem.

Pharmaceutical corporations are too dodgy. Companies don't give a shit about anything other than maximising their short term profits. Medicines need to be tested under various conditions for safety reasons. Aspirin is considered safe and therapeutic, so leave it alone. New drugs have risks and need to be assessed by pharmacologists etc.

Because if the govt only has the functions of 'protecting liberty, common defence etc' it's really only benefiting the wealthy by protecting their interests. That's why lolbertarians, right wingers etc are in favour of govt functions that serve only the capitalist class.

Nah I'm just a dropkick who's sick of unsubstantiated bullshit. But thanks bro

i don't give a flying fuck about the """"""rights"""""" of illegal immigrants

>why is the government stealing from me to pay for entitlements to niggers and illegals bad?

Gee.

>Education can be done private.
It can, but remember, all private enterprises are constructed for personal/profit reasons alone and are really unsuitable for social services, this is why most people are getting scammed (well, in my country) with programs that are private.

Well, you could google how charter schools are failing, as starters.

Stop. Let's assume that there are no illegal immigrants in the US. It's still not a fairlyland where poverty is not anymore a problem. I watched a documentary (I think it's from CBS) that narrates a life of an American woman getting through by the day because of Obamacare. She needed insulin shots for her diabetes.

No, she's not fat. It's genetic.

>Mylan is only interested in maximising its profits, not satisfying human need
Where do you think profits come from? All economic exchange is people trying to satisfy their needs by trading for what they have for what they want slightly more.

How is me making any trade ($5 for a lemonade, $12 for an hour of my labor) not just as greedy as a bunch of people making uncoerced trades in concert?

And if you think aspirin is safe and therapeutic, then tell the government to not force a whole bunch of labels on it. Like they do. But what about GMOs in food? Do the governments of the world need to do "tests under various conditions" before deeming it safe and allowing it to enter the market? Has sugar been properly researched? Why does the FDA require labeling of perfectly safe and therapeutic products and foods?

How safe do chairs need to be before the government can step away? Buildings?

The cheapest one is 200$ less per monththan the nice ones, but using the cheap one means 50-35$ generic prescriptions 40 $ copay compared to the nice plans where both are included in the monthly price.

Young healthy people are fucked in the ass by it. The same young healthy people expected to pay for the sick and old through social security.

People are forced to pay for coverage they will never need. Drug rehab, pregnancy, psych help. It's inneficient.

If you don't know what you're talking about and can only speak in memes, please just gtfo.

OP is looking for a legitimate political discussion, you mongoloid.

This is the part that I don't get.

If Obamacare's inefficient, why try revoke it instead of actually fixing the damn thing to work properly?

You do not have a right to the goods/services of others. To suggest you have a right to someone else's money or labor is the purest form of evil. Nobody has a 'right' to any portion of my money, least of all because they can't afford something independently.

A better question is: why do you think it's okay to force people to pay for someone else's healthcare at gunpoint? If the idea was so good, why wouldn't people pay in voluntarily?

Socialized medicine is evil. How is this hard to understand? There was no 'problem' with healthcare before Obamacare. People from literally all over the world come to America for healthcare.

>There's also some private fire department counties, where people can choose to buy their services before their house burns, or they can keep their money if they decide the risk isn't great enough for the costs.

it sounds nice on paper, but in reality i believe it'd more expansive, no?

first of all if you don't put out a fire right away, it can jump to the next building. so letting a house burn cause it didn't pay up is not really an option.

second you have an administrative and infrastructural overhead. example:
> during my student times i was plowing snow on sidewalks. Only should plow in front of the houses that payed us, other houses suposingly by other companies. so the whole sidewalk is a patchwork of plowed and unplowed for hours until maybe (if everything works and it seldomly did) all the sidwalk was plowed. it was highly inefective to me to drve for many km to just plow one stretch and leave others out. so you want a save plowed sidewalk for safety reasons, but you seldomly get it in total because some company is always late. you use so much administrative and vehicular resources. the same would be true for health care or fire departments i believe.

third if you give money to people to give it to private companies, either the money will not be enough or the companies will always charge more, than the people get, because they factor it in and thy can in the case of nescessaties. look at housing prices vs housing aid or the US university market price rise since the student loans kicked off..

>all private enterprises are constructed for personal/profit reasons alone
So there's no firms that have greater missions? As soon as this association or private entity sells something, they have no values? Someone better get on Tom's for giving away those shoes or Ben & Jerry's/Starbucks/etc. for their social beliefs, along with Chick-fil-A. You think moot ran Sup Forums for profit reasons alone?

And do you mean to include private charities or foundations in this?

I know jack shit about the education in the Philippines. But I'l say that having private organizations compete in a market against the same government services doesn't tell you that the private services couldn't be successful if there was no government. The government is the one that doesn't have to worry about adequately fulfilling people's needs; it can just collect taxes. If a private player doesn't serve the market well, it fails.

> if you give money to people to give it to private companies, either the money will not be enough or the companies will always charge more

Then why did healthcare premiums rise doubly or more under Obamacare, you economically illiterate Marxist cuck?

Damn you dumb.

I have very good insurance through my work, my monthly premiums have went up and up over the last few years. Actually around 20%. I don't think you know what you're talking about desu

Why do people buy a new car when their old one costs more to fix than its value of sold?

I just hate that I'm required by law to have healthcare now. I'm in my 30s and never needed it. If I went to the doctor, I'd pay for my ~$300 medicine and doctor visit and be done with it for a few years.

Now if I go to the doctor without healthcare, I have to pay the doctor + medicine fees + FINES FOR NOT HAVING HEALTHCARE. Even if I did have heathcare, I would never ever be able to reach the deductible as a single man with no family, so I still fucking have to pay the doctor + medicine fees + health insurance cost.

I literally don't give a single fuck about whatever the rest of his policies are, this single thing makes me want to gas all niggers.

In brief? There's nothing wrong with mandatory insurance systems. Switzerland and Germany have very functional ones. Obamacare was just a very bad one.

Firstly, the penalty for not having insurance is simply too low. It maxes out at $695 per adult (per year) in a household, which is far less expensive than buying insurance.

Secondly, the system essentially allows you to game it by signing up for insurance after you get sick.

So, if you're a young healthy person, the thing to do is to simply pay the fine, unless you get sick, in which case you just buy insurance until you don't need it any more, then drop it.

Obviously, this is not a sustainable system, and everyone who passed it knew it. The goal at the time of passage was simply to get legislation through congress and then fix it later. However, after the Obamacare passage fiasco, the Democratic party lost control of congress and could not longer pass legislation to correct the gaping flaws in the program.

That simple enough?

> Everyone is now mandated to buy a Big-Mac every day
> Big-Mac now consists of a soggy bun and a single meat paddy.

Redpill me on why this dumbfuckery is bad.

>1st point:
first of all if you don't put out a fire right away, it can jump to the next building. so letting a house burn cause it didn't pay up is not really an option.
The technicals of firefighting is where you think this breaks down? I mentioned one business model for a firefighting company, surely there are others. Even in the case where the firefighters only save the houses they pay, saving non-client houses in a dense urban area before the fire can jump would just be an example of a freerider effect. Look up the lighthouse question for a better example. Essentially, the question is whether we'd have lighthouses in a freemarket or whether you need to tax people

>2nd
So are we're talking about what people do on their private property and whether they can choose to make it safer for people on their property? Yes, you could have some holdouts who won't make an unsafe walking corridor. But if some sidewalk walkers value a free sidewalk, can't they foot the bill? If they don't value a clear walk as much as the sidewalk clearers cost, then how are we sure that it's worth it at all, and that this isn't just wealth redistribution instead of welfare-enhancing trade?

>3rd
No idea what you're trying to say here.

so it's a)
>a right to someone else's money or labor
this is the old question of what services a state must offer. for example military. if you think you need one as a country, a portion of your money/labor is not yours, but that of the state taken in the form of taxes. this money never belonged to you in the first place. or said differently - you were only able to get this money because the government provided a framework (safety in that case) to enable you to work. so you are taxed for it. the question now is, what are essential services. This is were eropeans and new worlders disagree on i think..because:

>There was no 'problem' with healthcare before Obamacare

if for you it is not a problem, that 40million people didn't have any coverage, than you are right. i think it is a problem, because it is ineffective. for example:
- those people can only go to the ER and there the service is much more expansive for the system as a whole.
- those people can't get preventative medicine, although is often cheaper to fix something early on than later, making it potentially a chronic problem.
- those people go to work more oftenly sick, endangering others and beeing less effective in the long run, if they have cured/stayed at home.

>a military can only exist if funded by money taken by force
Well, no, that's not how it works.

The problems you're listing aren't anybody's fault but the people that can't afford coverage... and they don't have any inherent right to demand money/services in the form of healthcare.

It's the same for food, or shelter, or clothes, or anything. Because you need it and do not have it does not give you the right to demand it from someone else.