Jump to content

The Affordable Care Act II - Because Mr. Obama Loves You All


Recommended Posts

quick reminder:

 

 

We know the CBO’s previous estimates of Obamacare enrollment have been badly wrong. From the Wall Street Journal:

In February 2013, CBO predicted that ObamaCare enrollment in the individual market would be 13 million in 2015, 24 million in 2016 and 26 million in 2017.

The actual enrollment for those years were, respectively, 11 million, 12 million and 10 million. As recently as March 2016, CBO was projecting an enrollment boom of 15 million for this year.

 

 

So pardon me if I don't get too excited by the CBO's quick release 'projection'

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a perfect example of why no one pays attention to CNN any more...or Democrats.

 

This is the story of a woman who lives in Imperial Valley, CA (otherwise known as BFE), a couple of hours east of San DIego.

 

Her current situation is horrible because where she lives, it's apparently impossible to see her doctor in a timely manner, and often has to take an entire day off work just to see her OBGYN, who would give her a prescription for birth control, which is provided for free through ACA.

 

It's such an inconvenience, she gets her birth control from Planned Parenthood.

 

If Trumpcare is passed, she said, she will have to drive to Mexico to get birth control because Trump is going to shut down Planned Parenthood.

 

That's right...to avoid giving up a day of work to see her OBGYN, she would drive to phucking MEXICO to get her birth control.

 

Because...Trump is going to do something that he isn't going to do.

 

You leftists have lost your phucking minds.

 

What was the point of that god awful sob story??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a perfect example of why no one pays attention to CNN any more...or Democrats.

 

This is the story of a woman who lives in Imperial Valley, CA (otherwise known as BFE), a couple of hours east of San DIego.

 

Her current situation is horrible because where she lives, it's apparently impossible to see her doctor in a timely manner, and often has to take an entire day off work just to see her OBGYN, who would give her a prescription for birth control, which is provided for free through ACA.

 

It's such an inconvenience, she gets her birth control from Planned Parenthood.

 

If Trumpcare is passed, she said, she will have to drive to Mexico to get birth control because Trump is going to shut down Planned Parenthood.

 

That's right...to avoid giving up a day of work to see her OBGYN, she would drive to phucking MEXICO to get her birth control.

 

Because...Trump is going to do something that he isn't going to do.

 

You leftists have lost your phucking minds.

 

In the meantime, my wife has bleeding ulcers she can't get treated because our insurance won't authorize an upper GI. But...free birth control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please explain to me how this is that much different than Obamacare? It still relies heavily on government spending as opposed to the private sector. It's a gift for the Democrats in '18 and '20 in two ways. The bill doesn't do enough to significantly help people who need health insurance to pay for rising ACA premiums as it does little to reduce them. They're not going to run out and vote for Republicans who promised them they would fully repeal and replace for seven years. It also proposes future cuts to Medicaid expansion that was originally established to help poor people which makes it more likely people will go out and vote Democrat. I could easily see Democrats being in the same position as Republicans in 2020 controlling all three branches (especially with Trump as president) and pushing for single payer or a reinstatement of the ACA with a public option.

People don't die under Obamacare.

They die under any other plan, just not Obamacare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

McConnell "threatening" that if bill fails, he will have to work with the Democrats.

 

What a concept. Work for the entire country!

 

The Senate sits there and deliberates, and then deliberates, and then deliberates some more.

 

Rarely does anything get put through the Senate in decent time.

 

Sometimes a man can work it to get legislature to pass through, LBJ was the last one who made it move from inside and then as a President

 

Which was what it was perfectly designed to do...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

McConnell "threatening" that if bill fails, he will have to work with the Democrats.

 

What a concept. Work for the entire country!

 

I am sure that you are well aware that this is a tactic by McConnell to try and get movement from the many GOP camps,

 

but your use of it from "on high"........is good too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You know they're not really cuts, right?

 

I mean, you know that increasing spending less than it was scheduled to be increased is still an increase, right?

There is no such thing as "smaller government." Only "lower rate of expansion government." One of the great ironies of conservatism is that they've been in power plenty of times but government spending only ever goes up.

 

If they're trying to soften the blow of the Medicaid expansion I imagine taking the wealthy tax cuts out of the bill would help. But of course softening the blow isn't the real purpose of the bill, the tax cuts are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I am sure that you are well aware that this is a tactic by McConnell to try and get movement from the many GOP camps,

 

 

 

I believe that is the tactic as well. And he should call their bluff and be willing to go through with it if they don't come to an agreement.

 

There is a deal to be done that could improve the status quo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CBO estimates almost 14 million will drop their insurance once they aren't forced to buy it.

That's the population equivalent of 13 states.

 

 

 

If I understand Nancy Pelosi correctly, that means 14 million people will be committing government-forced suicide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ROBERT POLLOCK: Let Consumers Repeal Obamacare.

 

What consumers need is the ability to shop for policies they can afford. Why not let young people, for example, buy inexpensive policies with high deductibles so that they are covered in case in case of accidents but pay out of pocket for routine care? And why should the 21st century health insurance system be broken up into 50 separate economies when efficiencies and convenience could be had by offering insurance options on a nationwide scale?

 

One easy way to make this happen is to create an Optional Federal Charter to regulate health insurance. Congress certainly has the power to do this under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause. It could be placed under the authority of the Department of Health and Human Services, which would be tasked by Congress with writing simple rules that ensure the availability of low cost policies nationwide. There would be no coverage mandates and no rules governing the shape of policies such as limits on deductibles and co-pays. Insurers could still be required to cover those with pre-existing conditions and subsidies could still be offered to help those who need them.

 

The beauty of the Optional Federal Charter solution is that none of the existing rules governing state regulated insurance policies would have to change. Consumers would simply be offered a new choice: purchase a state regulated policy or a federally regulated policy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the meantime, my wife has bleeding ulcers she can't get treated because our insurance won't authorize an upper GI. But...free birth control.

Correlation or causation from being married to you?

 

 

.

CBO estimates almost 14 million will drop their insurance once they aren't forced to buy it.

That's the population equivalent of 13 states.

 

 

 

If I understand Nancy Pelosi correctly, that means 14 million people will be committing government-forced suicide.

Every other industrialzed nation has a HC structure that provides HC to all its citizens for half the price...with better results....but keep those Pelosi takes coming because they are so FRESH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what are the average waiting times, robbins? How long does it take to get a new hip, a new knee, or have open heart surgery in those pantheons of socialized medicine? How much are their Drs. and Surgeons paid on average? Why do so many Cannucks come to America to get their open heart surgeries performed, hum? Don't they teach open heart surgery in Canuckistan medical schools?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every other industrialzed nation has a HC structure that provides HC to all its citizens for half the price...with better results....

 

You keep saying this, and I keep asking you to clarify, but every time I ask, you run away, which (to be honest) is a more desirable response.

 

But I'll ask again: please show us precisely how these other industrialized nations provides health care to all of it's citizens. In what way does it deliver this health care? Do they go door-to-door? Be specific.

 

Then show us the metrics by which you believe they have better results. Prepare to show your work.

 

Read the questions carefully. Answer them purposefully. Prove your point with facts.

 

We can wait.

 

Or disappear again. We can't wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correlation or causation from being married to you?

.

Every other industrialzed nation has a HC structure that provides HC to all its citizens for half the price...with better results....but keep those Pelosi takes coming because they are so FRESH

 

This argument get's brought up a lot and it's an incredibly naive point of view.

It's the same as asking why every other industrialized nation can get by with no aircraft carriers while the US needs 18 of them.

 

It's because the US is subsidizing the entire world so all these free-loading countries won't have to spend money on it. There's a reason why the US releases 4X more medical patents for worldwide use than the rest of the world COMBINED.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, many thanks to the US for its charitable work in defending and research. It's been excellent living in the satellite country of Canada.

 

what?? wait 10 seconds before the next post, oh the humanity...

Edited by row_33
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This argument get's brought up a lot and it's an incredibly naive point of view.

It's the same as asking why every other industrialized nation can get by with no aircraft carriers while the US needs 18 of them.

 

It's because the US is subsidizing the entire world so all these free-loading countries won't have to spend money on it. There's a reason why the US releases 4X more medical patents for worldwide use than the rest of the world COMBINED.

 

Ten carriers. Not eighteen. Ten.

 

And don't give me that "'phibs with flight decks are technically carriers." They're not, even if they forgot to put a well deck on the new LHAs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ten carriers. Not eighteen. Ten.

 

And don't give me that "'phibs with flight decks are technically carriers." They're not, even if they forgot to put a well deck on the new LHAs.

 

I didn't want to leave out the nations with helipads and ski jumps. AT least they're trying...

 

(I know the fleet cycles between 10 to 13 lately... but there have been talks of retrofitting some for training and drones, including the old diesel fleet.)

Edited by unbillievable
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ten carriers. Not eighteen. Ten.

 

And don't give me that "'phibs with flight decks are technically carriers." They're not, even if they forgot to put a well deck on the new LHAs.

Yup and when the Ford is up and running sometime this year we'll have 11.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

McConnell "threatening" that if bill fails, he will have to work with the Democrats.

 

What a concept. Work for the entire country!

 

That's the equivalent of Trump threatening to release tapes on Comey. McConnell was the face of Republican obstructionism under Obama and now he's trying to convince GOP Senators he's going to threaten to work with Democrats. LOL.

 

Vote on the Crime against Humanity bill is to be put off till after a few more Republicans can be convinced to support it

 

This bill barely qualifies as Obamacare lite. That hyperbole is ridiculous.

Every other industrialzed nation has a HC structure that provides HC to all its citizens for half the price...with better results....but keep those Pelosi takes coming because they are so FRESH

 

What did you just watch a Michael Moore documentary or something? I'd love to see the numbers on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

This bill barely qualifies as Obamacare lite. That hyperbole is ridiculous. ............It's all he can do Doc

 

What did you just watch a Michael Moore documentary or something? I'd love to see the numbers on that.....But,but....Baskin repeats it over and over......that makes it true.. :D

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What did you just watch a Michael Moore documentary or something? I'd love to see the numbers on that.

 

He has no numbers on that. He care barely keep up logging in and out of his Tiberius username in order to post this ridiculous drivel.

 

He just pops in, makes that moronic statement, then logs back in as Tiberius to add more moronic statements.

 

They're flip sides of the same lobotomy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barbarism Isn’t What It Used to Be

by Rich Lowrey

 

Despite Democrats’ continued hyperbole, the Republicans’ Medicaid reform is not unreasonable.

 

The Brezhnev Doctrine said that the Soviet empire could only expand and never give back its gains. A domestic version of the doctrine has long applied to the welfare state — and never so brazenly as in the debate over the Republican health-care bill.

 

Its reforms to Medicaid are portrayed as provisions to all but forcibly expel the elderly from nursing homes and send poor children to the workhouse. Bernie Sanders has called the bill “barbaric,” a word that once was reserved for, say, chattel slavery or suttee, but is now considered appropriate for a change in the Medicaid funding formula.

 

The Republican health bills have two major elements on Medicaid: rolling back the enhanced funding for the Obama Medicaid expansion, and over time instituting a new per capita funding formula for the program. . . . . . . .The horror.

 

The Democrats now make it sound as if the Obama expansion is part of the warp and woof of Medicaid. In fact, it was a departure from the norm in the program, which since its inception has been, quite reasonably, limited to poor children, pregnant women, the disabled, and the ailing elderly.

Obamacare changed it to make a priority of covering able-bodied adults.

 

{snip}

 

So, perversely, Obamacare has a more generous federal match for the able-bodied enrollees in Medicaid than for its more vulnerable populations.

 

“This higher federal matching rate,” writes health-care analyst Doug Badger, “allows states to leverage more federal money per state dollar spent on a nondisabled adult with $15,000 in earnings than on a part-time minimum wage worker with developmental disabilities who earns barely half that amount.”

 

According to Badger, West Virginia received seven times as much federal money for spending $1 on an able-bodied adult than for spending $1 on a disabled person.

 

This obviously makes no sense, and the Senate health-care bill phases out the enhanced funding over several years. But it doesn’t end the expanded Medicaid eligibility for the able-bodied. And a refundable tax credit will be available for low-income people that is meant to pick up any slack from Medicaid. This is hardly Social Darwinism.

 

The other, longer-term change in the House and Senate bills is moving to a per capita funding formula for Medicaid, with the Senate bill ratcheting the formula down to a per capita rate pegged to inflation — in 2025. Maybe this will prove too stringent, but it used to be a matter of bipartisan consensus that the current structure of Medicaid creates an incentive for heedless growth in the program.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/448994/medicaid-expansion-ahca-democrats-rhetoric-remains-hyperbolic


Edited by B-Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

. LOL.

 

 

 

This bill barely qualifies as Obamacare lite. That hyperbole is ridiculous.

t.

Not sure how you can say that. 22 million off of their insurance. and yes I remember you said you had a better measure of this bill than the CBO. I'll believe them though, instead of your estimate.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vote on the Crime against Humanity bill is to be put off till after a few more Republicans can be convinced to support it

 

Y'know...It's a recognized position of international law that the use of violence is morally appropriate when opposing crimes against humanity.

 

So either show some guts, put your money where your mouth is, and come up to DC and shoot some Republican legislators. Or shut the !@#$ up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Y'know...It's a recognized position of international law that the use of violence is morally appropriate when opposing crimes against humanity.

 

So either show some guts, put your money where your mouth is, and come up to DC and shoot some Republican legislators. Or shut the !@#$ up.

 

Don't ever try and practice law. You would be really bad at it. Though I'm sure your obfuscations to a jury might make a good laugh, but any decent lawyer would just cut you to threads

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I didn't want to leave out the nations with helipads and ski jumps. AT least they're trying...

 

(I know the fleet cycles between 10 to 13 lately... but there have been talks of retrofitting some for training and drones, including the old diesel fleet.)

 

Actually, I was referring to the current vogue of counting LHAs and LHDs in the gator navy as "American carriers." Which is where the number "eighteen" usually comes from. I'll grant some navies have "carriers," such as Japan's Hyuga-class or Thailand's royal yacht...but there's far more to a carrier than a flat deck and airplanes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ouch!

 

"History suggests that presidents who have governed successfully have been both revered and feared. But Republican fixtures in Washington are beginning to conclude that Trump may be neither, despite his mix of bravado, threats and efforts to schmooze with GOP lawmakers."

 

This president is the first president in our history who has neither political nor military experience, and thus it has been a challenge to him to learn how to interact with Congress and learn how to push his agenda better, said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who opposes the current health-care bill."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why people voted for Trump, they are fed up with politics as normal.

 

Very few Presidents were able to get both sides of the aisle to work with him, except in times of war (real war) and other emergencies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why people voted for Trump, they are fed up with politics as normal.

 

Very few Presidents were able to get both sides of the aisle to work with him, except in times of war (real war) and other emergencies.

 

Yeah. Looks like Trump is your typical president then so far. Surprise surprise. The best thing Trump can do is not to do any interviews when it comes to healthcare because he always seems to shoot himself in the foot as he clearly has little understanding of the bill proposed by the Senate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...