The_Heretic

Racheteering, Intimidation, Criminal, Organization. R.I.C.O. is the offense of threatening someone to pay extortion for "protection" [such as it is] from the very same group you're forced to pay off.

So my question is if Hillary's "RomneyCare" plan is found to be in violation of the R.I.C.O. statute, would it be ruled as illegal by a judge and could Hillary along with her insurance industry pimps be tried both in criminal and civil law?

Most likely it'll be libertarians to push this point of law and be the first to challenge her plan in court, but whoever here has a legal background is free to answer this.

__________________

John McCain: "He's in Iraq... with a few centuries to kill."

DRS112

HA! Heretic thinks libertarians may be useful

but yeah...I think it is...that's why I hate it...why does it matter if it's the govt. or the mafia doing it.

The counter argument would be taxation for the military though....

PursuitOfHappinessParty

Wouldn't this be more in the area of the ACLU?

Why would the Libertarians get into the action?

My legal experience is mostly paying my lawyer and being quiet.

__________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It puts the lotion on its skin, or else it gets the hose again.

The_Heretic

See, one of the lies which Alien queen drolls out is that her's is a universal healthcare plan when in fact it's nothing of the kind. u/nder her plan [Romeny's plan, really] I MUST pay the premiums on insurnace whether that insurer covers me or not, whether I can afford it or not. There's the argument that I'll be subsidized- the truth is the insurance industry in fact does, but under what standards? How poor is too poor to afford your own insurance? She doesn't say. What guarantee do I have my forced insurance will cover me when I need it for my survival? Hillary, again, has no answers.

If Hillary's plan got through congress with any similarity to what she intends it'll be a direct financial attack against me and millions of others who JUST CANNOT AFFORD to buy health insurance. Her claim that we don't because we think we're immortal is insulting, degrading and the most backhanded comment I've ever seen aimed in my general direction. I'd LOVE to be insured so hospitals don't charge me quadruple the going rate for saving lives.

My life is already a jungle. I can safely assume that ALL the So-So Security, Medicare and Medicade payments gleaned from my paycheck will never be there when I need them [especially not for retirement], and so those are effectively non-tax deductible donations. But now Hillary wants to leech more money from me on behalf of her clients, the insurance cartel.

Except the military provides a service that's clearly tangible. An insurance company which knows they can take my money and return absolutely no services whatsoever has no comparison to the military in any form.

__________________

John McCain: "He's in Iraq... with a few centuries to kill."

Insipid

No,it would not be under the Rico act. Nor would social security, medicaide and medicair. But you know this, your just putting out this idiotic, insulting piece of drivel because you want people to think mafia when they think of Hillary. Secondly there ARE people out there who will not buy health insurance even if they can afford it. People don't always make wise decisions with their money or about their health. Exhibit A: smokers. I rest my case. Thirdly, Hillary's plan provides for poor folks such as yourself who can't afford health care. There is no one out there who will be made broke from Hillary's plan. In fact, we'll ALL pay less for health care the more people join in. Insurance gets cheaper the more people who are part of it. But if you would actually bother reading Hillary's plan instead of blindly swallowing all the propaganda your given you'd know that.

PursuitOfHappinessParty

But is there not some issue with provisions for certain wage earners to be mandated to purchase this exact same plan?

Notice how you and Hillary both make that easy seque from health-care affordability to something that doesn't actually provide any service: privatized insurance? Yes, we "ALL pay less for health care the more people join in. What a nice little game for the insurance company to have unpaid advertisements and endorsements such as these!! Go ahead and tell me how having this admited for profit loop in the system actually makes it CHEAPER!!

UHC is significantly cheaper under only one scenario: Universal. Once we take the claim delaying/denying, lobbyist-strong, for profit burden on Health Care out of the system ( with it's premiums from the patient/employer, premiums from the Dr., and premiums from the Hospital with deductibles, co-pays, caps, and denials impeding payments that mostly means money back to itself) then you have UHC. Check any hospital or in-patient bill and look for $20 aspirins to realize you have UHC now, only it's hidden to keep the insurance companies alive.
Profiting off a social eventuality of every citizen.

__________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It puts the lotion on its skin, or else it gets the hose again.

DRS112

Yeah...being forced to pay for something you didn't have to before is cheaper.


Talk about swallowing propaganda.

Insipid

Well, Hillary's plan, like Edwards also calls for people to have the ability to buy into a state-run health care plan which does not have the profit motive. I myself am for Kucinich's Medicare for all approach. But seeing as how that's not going to happen, i think the opening premise for ALL Democratic plans should be universal health care and that Barack Obama ought to hang his head in shame for advancing the notion that universal care will be more costly.

Having more people buy into the system makes it cheaper in that the people that cost the least to insure are the ones most likely to bow out no matter how cheap it gets. Furthermore, Hillary's plan to allow anyone to buy into Medicaid or into the Congressional insurance plan will force insurance companies to cut cost drastically to compete. It will end the kinard that state health insurance is less efficient than private health insurance. I think, since private insurance CAN'T compete it will go the way of the dinosaur in a few years.

But one thing for sure is this: as long as the very rich or very young get to opt out of health insurance it will be more costly for all, and less efficient. Obama recognizes this too, which is why he is talking about a penalty for those who decide to opt out. How people who can't afford the insurance can afford the penalty is beyond me.

This whole notion that Democrats are speaking AGAINST mandates is beyond me. And that Barack is the one who is labeled as the progressive or more liberal is confusing as hell. First he puts forth the notion that SS is in trouble, now he's speaking out against mandates. This guy seems far more Republican lite than Hillary does in the respects that really matter.

Insipid

Yes, it is cheaper. We ALL pay for health care eventually because we all get sick eventually. The problem is how much it will cost when we get sick. If we have health care and get treated in the early stages, the treatment is relatively cheap. If we have to wait to go to an emergency room it's expensive.

We're ALL paying for universal health care now. We pay more for health care as a percentage of our GDP than any industrialized county. And yet we have less health care. This is largely because we do not have universal health care.

DRS112

So universal by force is the solution...

No...the whole premise of making it cheaper is based on the idea that 20-somethings who are not likely to get sick will pay more into the system than they use. That is not cheaper for them. Which means it is not cheaper for All...just some.