Ask Any Democrat, Obamacare Is Going Great...

[NickiC]

I guess Republicans teach their children that they don't really need health insurance, since Ronald Reagan fixed it so that they could just use ER's when they need basic medical care.

They are ignorant. I refuse anymore for redneck healthcare. The ER is tax payer dollars. I don't want to pay for you so get your crap together and get some insurance. Go on do it. Can't? Then deal with your politicians.

This is about life and not politics.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

You really *topped* that, Q? Every fucking post. Unbelievable.

Reminds me of a guy I was in Boot Camp with. It didn't matter what story anyone told, he had it happen to him, one of his relatives, or a close friend but usually on a grander scale. After awhile we all just started making up ridiculous shit just to fuck with his stupid ass. He never did figure it out and is probably still the butt of jokes to this day.

 

[Ishmael]

Query asked a pointed and pertinent question, "If 'ShuckNJiveCare' is so good, why are the democrats running away from it?"

The opponents of the act point out overall statistics whilst the proponents respond with individual anecdotal stories. I have no doubt that there are some that have benefited by the act. Afterall, it's an ill wind indeed that blows no one no good. But for every story of benefit out there is a corresponding 'horror' story that the proponents sweep under the carpet. Stories of families losing their insurance entirely and stories of insured individuals with pre-existing conditions being stripped of their insurance plan and thrown into the high-risk pool with subsequent increases in premiums and deductibles. You cannot cite the one without citation of the other if you want to dive into the pool of anecdotal stories.

The stated goal of "ShuckNJiveCare" was to insure ALL Americans. According to various surveys there are anywhere from 7 to 9 million now insured that were preciously without insurance with the baseline number being estimated at 47 million uninsured. While the percentage increase in insured is substantial, it still doesn't come close to 50% decrease in uninsured. The proponents state that that number will go down as the penalties increase exponentially. And it's hard to argue against that notion. But at what cost?

It is becoming apparent that having insurance and having access are two completely different, and quite independent, metrics. A fact that the designers of the program seemed to have overlooked entirely.

The numbers also don't take into consideration the numbers of individuals that are insured but will not take advantage of the benefits due to the onerously high deductibles that seem to be the norm for the program and the numbers on that phenomena are NOT in yet.

So that brings us right back to Query's original question.

Ishmael

 

[Busybody]

So that brings us right back to Query's original question.

Ishmael

wait till

all those regulations and costs etc

that have been POSTPONED

start to hit!

 

[Busybody]

by now it is clear

NO ONE on the DUMOH side actually read the act before they voted for it


by now it is clear

NO ONE on the DUMOH side actually LISTENED to all the warnings from those that read the act issued before the signing

NOTHING that has happened....NOTHING....wasn't put out there by those that read it....THEY WERE ALL CALLED RACIST

 

[about_average]

A much cheaper and simpler solution would have been to put more people on medicaid ....

That was the plan. Part of the problem is that many states decided to ignore that part of it.

 

[Que]

You really *topped* that, Q? Every fucking post. Unbelievable.

I was commiserating with you. Not "topping" your story. Pain is pain. FWIW, an ankle, though less painfull to break is much harder to rehabilitate. It was painful, but I could walk (sort of) before I left the hospital.

~laughs~

Not sure what part of that post strained credulity for you. I considered saying, "Just to annoy Disgustipated, I can top that..." In the spirit of the genuine human feelings being shared, I thought I would refrain.

To tie together the two outlandish stories, my mother (the former ER nurse) made it to the hospital within 20 minutes. She likely saved my foot by pointing out the poor circulation it was getting. They rotated it without drugs. OW. Thanks, Ma.

You will get well. I have a relative in a chair. She fights hard. Good luck

I appreciate the well-wishes, but I have been able to hide whats left of my limp for years. This happened in the eighties.

I agree. My bad.

Fair enough. In the spirit of the fellowship of the crippled, I sincerely wish you speed, strength and health in recovery.

Reminds me of a guy I was in Boot Camp with. It didn't matter what story anyone told, he had it happen to him, one of his relatives, or a close friend but usually on a grander scale. After awhile we all just started making up ridiculous shit just to fuck with his stupid ass. He never did figure it out and is probably still the butt of jokes to this day.

Ever occur to you that not everyone is as full of shit as you are?

I don't have my x-ray handy, maybe the scars will do?

 

[Que]

That was the plan. Part of the problem is that many states decided to ignore that part of it.

That was a retarded part of the plan, to get the camels nose under the tent for what? three years then have it be an unfunded entitlement.

Lets say you could force the States to do it. Why would that one part not be plenty?

Once you put everyone that cannot afford premiums on medicaid you are done with bulk of the stated, alleged problem, "too many uninsured."

For the few left that are not simply choosing to be uninsured-

Instead of this nonsense about no preexisting conditions (which make it not insurance at all..makes it wait till you need it to buy it coverage) why not simply have a high risk pool and subsidize as above?

You already have medicaid and medicaid offices and administrators.

I could fit all that on a sheet of paper. Not 20,000 pages.

 

[possum123]

When the republicans win the presidency does anyone really think they will stop Obamacare?

 

[Busybody]

no

its carved in stone

never be repealed

let the people suffer

 

[dan_c00000]

There is so much bullshit and lies told about ACA, there's no way to know what to believe, except what you see up close.

A friend of mine is about to go on disability because of vascular disease. Since we live in a state with a Republican governor who wants to be President, he's not eligible for Medicaid. His Cobra insurance premium was going to be $950 a month. I gave him the card of my Blue Cross agent and told him just to give him a call. It turns out he is eligible for a Blue Cross ACA compliant policy with better coverage than his old employer major medical plan, for about $150 a month.

Also, it's good anyplace they take Blue Cross.

There's what you just described, let's call it reality, and there's what vette think is going on. The doctors supposedly opting appears to be another right wing scare story made up and carried by right wing "media".

That number seemed impressively high so I did a little digging and found a whopping three doctors that wouldn't accept ACA patients.

In vette's, and the rest of his tiny dicked and tiny brained right wing clowns, world it's ok to discriminate against health insurance plans because there's a black guy in charge.

 

[Que]

When the republicans win the presidency does anyone really think they will stop Obamacare?

No. That is why they have given us 4 years of "carrots" and delayed entirely the sticks.

When the sticks finally have to be employed, a "fix" will be proposed to take out the sting at a huge, unsustainable cost.

Which will just be added to the stack of huge, unsustainable costs that we borrow to pay each month.

 

[Busybody]

no

its carved in stone

never be repealed

let the people suffer

actually the Repoh Congress just introduced a new bill with a repeal and replace

WILL NEVER HAPPEN

 

[unregistered]

 

[toubab]

I think at the very least it will definitely modified because it is unsustainable in it's present form.

It will have to be greatly modified, at the very least, but it will still be a shitty plan that benefits insurance companies at the expense of mandated purchasers of policies and at the expense of taxpayers.

 

[Amberchgo]

It will have to be greatly modified, at the very least, but it will still be a shitty plan that benefits insurance companies at the expense of mandated purchasers of policies and at the expense of taxpayers.

It will grow into just another unsustainable entitlement. The latest estimates are that by 2020 2/3 of the federal spending will be on entitlements and debt servicing.

So the choices will come down to which are reduced ... entitlements or everything else.

 

[Busybody]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BiTYaLqCUAAQ7US.jpg

 

[Busybody]

I think at the very least it will definitely modified because it is unsustainable in it's present form.

if its modified

2016 will be 100%

REPOZ TOOK AWAY YOUR HEALTH CARE

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[toubab]

It won't benefit the Insurance companies if no one can afford the deductibles, or if America itself can't afford it. It's already having an adverse effect on the American economy. Get government out of the picture and market solutions will solve this problem. The government is not smart enough to manage or direct the American medical system.

People have two choices. Buy the policy, or don't buy the policy and face a penalty for not buying it. That seems like a favorable situation for insurance companies to me. Especially when the government guarantees payment of the balance of premiums due, if the mandated purchaser can't afford the full load.

 

[unregistered]

 

[possum123]

Except that the SCOTUS, in words of Justice Roberts, said in it's decision on the case that there is no enforcement mechanism in the law for extracting that penalty. So all that's left to the Obama administration is the IRS keeping your refund as a payment towards the alleged penalty, or the lawless President writing his own law, if he does, that will eventually be tested in yet another series of court hearings, all the way to the SCOTUS.

I've already told you, the economics of Obamacare are unsustainable, so the government can promise all it wants, but it eventually collapses of it's own weight, because the Democrat plan structure is fatally flawed.

When has the U.S. let a little thing like unsustainable stop it from doing anything?

 

[Disgustipated]

Reminds me of a guy I was in Boot Camp with. It didn't matter what story anyone told, he had it happen to him, one of his relatives, or a close friend but usually on a grander scale. After awhile we all just started making up ridiculous shit just to fuck with his stupid ass. He never did figure it out and is probably still the butt of jokes to this day.

That's classic.

Query asked a pointed and pertinent question, "If 'ShuckNJiveCare' is so good, why are the democrats running away from it?"

The opponents of the act point out overall statistics whilst the proponents respond with individual anecdotal stories. I have no doubt that there are some that have benefited by the act. Afterall, it's an ill wind indeed that blows no one no good. But for every story of benefit out there is a corresponding 'horror' story that the proponents sweep under the carpet. Stories of families losing their insurance entirely and stories of insured individuals with pre-existing conditions being stripped of their insurance plan and thrown into the high-risk pool with subsequent increases in premiums and deductibles. You cannot cite the one without citation of the other if you want to dive into the pool of anecdotal stories.

The stated goal of "ShuckNJiveCare" was to insure ALL Americans. According to various surveys there are anywhere from 7 to 9 million now insured that were preciously without insurance with the baseline number being estimated at 47 million uninsured. While the percentage increase in insured is substantial, it still doesn't come close to 50% decrease in uninsured. The proponents state that that number will go down as the penalties increase exponentially. And it's hard to argue against that notion. But at what cost?

It is becoming apparent that having insurance and having access are two completely different, and quite independent, metrics. A fact that the designers of the program seemed to have overlooked entirely.

The numbers also don't take into consideration the numbers of individuals that are insured but will not take advantage of the benefits due to the onerously high deductibles that seem to be the norm for the program and the numbers on that phenomena are NOT in yet.

So that brings us right back to Query's original question.

Ishmael

Shaddup, dummy.

 

[unregistered]