The Instigator
Sully_199
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
fluffybunnypuff
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points

Obamacare

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Sully_199
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/1/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 774 times Debate No: 38358
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

Sully_199

Con

Wow. Why are we still trying to force healthcare on people who really don't want it? We're already piles in debt with medical bills, why are we trying to bury ourselves ?
fluffybunnypuff

Pro

tell senators on the fence about obamacare to repeal obamacare and why.
my post: cnn lies about congress's obamacare exemption: http://www.sodahead.com...
read more on my repeal obamacare poll http://www.sodahead.com...
https://secure.teapartypatriots.org... exempt america from obamacare petition.
http://www.teapartypatriots.org... stop funding for obamacare peition.
http://www.dontfundobamacare.com...
sign these pititions and spread all over
defund obamacare poll http://liveliketherestofus.com...

repeal obama care because its too big, it was rammed thru w/o majority public support. they can re-introduce parts of the bill. nothing longer than 1page should be passed at a time, and shouldnt be passed unless the majority of the public understands it, and preferably also not until the majority of the public approves it.
laws and regulations should be simplified and easy for all to understand. remove exsessive laws/regs.
let prv bussiness's do what they want as long as their not committing fraud, contract breach, theft, robbery, property damage, kidnapping, physcial abuse, or murder.
put conditions on in order to receive tax breaks or gov-funding. once a bussiness receives gov funding it then becomes at least partially gov sector.
competition and consumer choice lowers costs and increases quality. let the consumer choose what provider they want and what coverage they want.
give poor people premuim support for health insurances of their choice within the limits of it being under a certian cost and it doesnt cover more than birth control, and testing for and treating physcial health problems.
gov could put some $ in a poor persons health saveings account that can only be spent on birth control and testing for and treating physcial health problems.
gov could pay for poor people's birth control and testing for and treating pyhscial health problems.
hospitals and health insureres shouldnt be extra punitilivy taxed for not selling or covering birth control or other products/services.
forceing/coroceing people to buy insurance has the same effect as tax in that it forces/coroces people to pay for other people's healthcare costs. people shuldnt be punitivly taxed for not wanting to buy health insurance. maybe why the fine is cheaper than the insurance is because gov's goal is gov funded healthcare only and no private insurance.
gov insurance/healthcare is lower quality and more abusive than private, because private must provide a quality service that people are willing to buy in order to stay in bussiness, while gov insurance/corrupt gov minions is allowed to steal from the public to fund its bussiness and force/coerce recepiants to receive treatments and coverage they dont want.
when people become elidgable for gov health insurance at age 65(many arnt allowed to opt out), they become victimized by the healthcare system( misdiagnosis, over-treatment, neglect/abuse, forced treatment and expirements...) more than 360times more than at age 64. fradulent "healthcare providers" often foribly partially paralyze and permantly disable victims, in order to receive tax payer $ to keep them in a nurseing home and pay for treatments(torture/abuse is a type of treatment, and is fraudlently covered under gov insurance under code names)
60%+ of tax payer $ that funds gov health insurance, is spent commiting fraud agianst, or victimizeing, innocent recipiants.
people who have insurance, are more likley to be victimzed by the "healthcare" industry, than those who arnt insured.
the affordable care act isnt affordable beacuse its raiseing taxes to pay for it. gov shouldnt be allowed to punitivily tax whatever it wants to.
dont require employeers to provide employees with health insurance, only a minimum wage. minimum wage is high enough for full time employees to buy their own $300/m health insurance(in most cases.)raise minimum wage slightly for areas where minimum wage isnt sufficent for an adv full time employee to buy themself health insurance that only covers birth control, and testing for and treating physcial health problems.
confidenaltiy contract breach giving or selling gov your/the public's medical records w/o your/the public's permit=fired, licence revolked, and owe refund.
gov's job isnt to collect everyone's medical records wo their permit, gov workers who dont do their job=fired.
immedialty fire all gov workers who want to collect the public's medical records w/o their permit.
to reduce healthcare costs, help make sure people are able to live healthy lives and increase healthcare supply.
mandated health insurance is a new tax that forces healthy middle class people to pay for sick rich people, instead of how its sapoe to be: the rich pay for the poor's healthcare.
reportedly people die because gov wont pay for their multi organ transplant, while obama steals $millions+ from the poor and middle class, causeing them to not be able to afford their own healthcare, and obama spends it on his $million lavish vacations...

if someone with a pre exsisting condition cant afford prv health insurance, gov should cover what they cant afford.
if you force insurance companies to cover people w pre exsisting conditions, the insurance company might not be able to afford to operate, or costs will go up customers go down profit potentially goes down, and it disincentivies people to invest in and work in health insurance bussiness because they cant make as much $, reduceing quantity=incraseing cost.
people shouldnt be fined/extra taxed/punished for being an insurance company.

forceing people onto obamacare is unconsitutional because, obama is unconstitional as well as many fradulent representivies in gov includeing most if not all who are in favor of obamacare, resulting in any legislation these crooks "pass" as void.
obamacare is also unconsitutional because it doesnt have majortiy of the country's support, the whole point of electing REPRESENTITIVES is they are sapose to represent the majority of their district/area they were elected in, if they arnt doing that then they arnt a representitive, instead a fraud.
fineing/stealing from people for whatever reason you want is ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL, another reason why obamacare is unconstitutional because it wants to fine people for not buying insurance. constituion art II sec 8 "the congress shall have power to..collect taxes..to..provide for the common defence and general welfare.." it doesnt say to collect taxes for whatever reason it wants ex:its not legal to tax blacks more than whites. art II sec 9 "no money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of apporpriations made by law.." art IX the enumeration in the consitution, of certian rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people" art XIV "..no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens.." fineing people for not buying health insruance would deny people the current right to not be fined for not buying health insurance. 8th amendment "nor excessive fines imposed"

constituion sec 7 how bills become law. ban from gov jobs anyone who signs a bill they didnt read. void all bills that havent been read by who signed them.
its illegal to fine someone for not buying a product for themself.
its unconstitional and illegal theft to tax the middle class to pay for rich people's healthcare that the rich people can afford themself.
constituion art II sec 8 "the congress shall have power to..collect taxes..to..provide for the common defence and general welfare.." welfare doesnt=takeing from the poor to give to the rich.
Debate Round No. 1
Sully_199

Con

Sully_199 forfeited this round.
fluffybunnypuff

Pro

fluffybunnypuff forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Sully_199

Con

Sully_199 forfeited this round.
fluffybunnypuff

Pro

fluffybunnypuff forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by bsh1 3 years ago
bsh1
Sully_199fluffybunnypuffTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:42 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro got the sides mixed up. Obviously, Pro has far more sources, but loses a point for messing up sides, and also loses out on argumentation due to the fact that he's supporting Con.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 3 years ago
RoyLatham
Sully_199fluffybunnypuffTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was supposed to argue in favor of the resolution, but apparently didn't read Con's opening statement and mistaken supported the con side. Since both debaters were on the Con side, Con wins arguments despite having done nearly nothing, It's like running the football into the wrong end zone; the score still counts. Pro's spelling and grammar were so bad as to make his arguments difficult to follow. Pro's reference to reading assignments must be ignored; all arguments must be made in the debate within the character limits. Forfeits by both sides provide offsetting conduct violations.