A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    There can be no doubt that the ACA as it is written today is a lukewarm compromise..an imperfect legislation that was the best Congress and the Obama administration could compromise on. Many on the left dislike it because it doesn't go far enough towards the universal, single payer health care systems that most other industrialized nations enjoy. Many on the right dislike it because they view it as government takeover of health care ( not even close) and they view the mandate penalty as a tax (it is..but so what?) or because essentially they dislike Obama.

    While many of the ACA's more positive attributes have been slowly rolled out over the past couple of years..the most recent rollout of the enrollment process has left much to be desired. In addition to that...there are instances where reality is not living up to the rhetoric. ( such as "you can keep your health plan if you like it").

    Another ironic but unintentional consequence of ACA is the adverse reaction it is going to have on Massachusetts consumers and businesses. I say ironic because the successful health care model that has been in place since 2007 has been held up as an example by the Obama administration to bolster the ACA. Yet..this very successful MA model stands to be penalized by the ACA .  The market rating guidelines contained in ACA will have an adverse effect on rates for almost half of Massachusetts residents.

    There is strong bipartisan agreement on the state level that given the success of its health care model...MA should be exempt from these rating guidelines. Gov. Patrick as requested a waiver twice..and twice has been turned down..receiving only a 3 year transitional waiver. This is counter to what we heard from President Obama...who assured that waivers would be granted for states who had successful models that worked for them.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from AlleyCatBruin. Show AlleyCatBruin's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to miscricket's comment:

    There can be no doubt that the ACA as it is written today is a lukewarm compromise..an imperfect legislation that was the best Congress and the Obama administration could compromise on. Many on the left dislike it because it doesn't go far enough towards the universal, single payer health care systems that most other industrialized nations enjoy. Many on the right dislike it because they view it as government takeover of health care ( not even close) and they view the mandate penalty as a tax (it is..but so what?) or because essentially they dislike Obama.

    While many of the ACA's more positive attributes have been slowly rolled out over the past couple of years..the most recent rollout of the enrollment process has left much to be desired. In addition to that...there are instances where reality is not living up to the rhetoric. ( such as "you can keep your health plan if you like it").

    Another ironic but unintentional consequence of ACA is the adverse reaction it is going to have on Massachusetts consumers and businesses. I say ironic because the successful health care model that has been in place since 2007 has been held up as an example by the Obama administration to bolster the ACA. Yet..this very successful MA model stands to be penalized by the ACA .  The market rating guidelines contained in ACA will have an adverse effect on rates for almost half of Massachusetts residents.

    There is strong bipartisan agreement on the state level that given the success of its health care model...MA should be exempt from these rating guidelines. Gov. Patrick as requested a waiver twice..and twice has been turned down..receiving only a 3 year transitional waiver. This is counter to what we heard from President Obama...who assured that waivers would be granted for states who had successful models that worked for them.



    Well put, miscricket. While the ACA was well intended, it has caused some un-intended problems.  Universal Healthcare will solve those problems eventually.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hansoribrother. Show Hansoribrother's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    Government had already taken over health care before ACA. ACA only makes it worse. They already own the VA as actual government run health care. They provide health care insurance for everyone over 65. They control reimbursement formulas. They over-regulate everything else via the FDA and other agencies (no WDYWN I am not saying to get rid of all regulations).

    The absence of logic on the left - government has f'd up so bad with Obamcare that we should just have the government as the sole payer.

    A novel idea: how about making the PATIENT the sole payer?? Makes too much sense and not enough people in the way to take their share.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Government had already taken over health care before ACA. ACA only makes it worse. They already own the VA as actual government run health care. They provide health care insurance for everyone over 65. They control reimbursement formulas. They over-regulate everything else via the FDA and other agencies (no WDYWN I am not saying to get rid of all regulations).

    The absence of logic on the left - government has f'd up so bad with Obamcare that we should just have the government as the sole payer.

    A novel idea: how about making the PATIENT the sole payer?? Makes too much sense and not enough people in the way to take their share.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd prefer the patient be the sole payer than this insurance nonsense.  Nobody knows what their insurance needs are, until they need it.  It's just driving up the real costs of health care.

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    Hahaha...the govt couldn't even get a website done correctly and people want them to run our entire health care? Wow....hahaha. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Government had already taken over health care before ACA. ACA only makes it worse. They already own the VA as actual government run health care. They provide health care insurance for everyone over 65. They control reimbursement formulas. They over-regulate everything else via the FDA and other agencies (no WDYWN I am not saying to get rid of all regulations).

    The absence of logic on the left - government has f'd up so bad with Obamcare that we should just have the government as the sole payer.

    A novel idea: how about making the PATIENT the sole payer?? Makes too much sense and not enough people in the way to take their share.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd prefer the patient be the sole payer than this insurance nonsense.  Nobody knows what their insurance needs are, until they need it.  It's just driving up the real costs of health care.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Transparency in costs is something we should be fighting for no doubt. However, if we make the individual the sole payer then what happens when a major illness hits? More bankrupticies..etc.

    If we believe that basic health care is a right in this country then we should have universal, single payer health care. It's really that simple.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Hahaha...the govt couldn't even get a website done correctly and people want them to run our entire health care? Wow....hahaha. 

    [/QUOTE]


    The website and the rollout were abysmal...but I really wouldn't see that as a reflection of the healthcare system itself. Technical issues are just that..technical issues. If procurement rules allowed for the government to hire the best person for the job..then we probably wouldn't have seen this kind of mess.

    That said..there are no shortage of issues that are coming to light with Obamacare..such as this issue in MA.  Like any salesperson...Obama clearly made some promises that were not going to be kept.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to miscricket's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Government had already taken over health care before ACA. ACA only makes it worse. They already own the VA as actual government run health care. They provide health care insurance for everyone over 65. They control reimbursement formulas. They over-regulate everything else via the FDA and other agencies (no WDYWN I am not saying to get rid of all regulations).

    The absence of logic on the left - government has f'd up so bad with Obamcare that we should just have the government as the sole payer.

    A novel idea: how about making the PATIENT the sole payer?? Makes too much sense and not enough people in the way to take their share.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd prefer the patient be the sole payer than this insurance nonsense.  Nobody knows what their insurance needs are, until they need it.  It's just driving up the real costs of health care.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Transparency in costs is something we should be fighting for no doubt. However, if we make the individual the sole payer then what happens when a major illness hits? More bankrupticies..etc.

    If we believe that basic health care is a right in this country then we should have universal, single payer health care. It's really that simple.

    [/QUOTE]

    Here's the thing:  people, individuals, best know their needs, and are responsible for their needs.  Government always comes in promising better, but in the end, deliver on their best day, one size fits all mediocrity for the execution portion of the issue, in exchange for some level of reduced liberty.  This is the big government model of dependency.  It never gets you back on your feet, but keeps you sedated in a relationship where your needs are met by faceless desk jockey's in D.C., forever.

    Basic health care is not a right, but even if it was, that doesn't translate into me paying for your health care through my taxes.  It is your responsibility to provide for you and yours.  You have no claim on the general purse due to your unwillingness to provide for your self, or due to your unfortunate set of circumstances.  For the truly indigent, of course we should provide at least basic healthcare.  I don't think anyone is arguing that.

    Summation:  Government at best provides mediocrity for all, while private repsonsibility provides the optimal solution for all given their needs, wants, and capabilities, with no forceful coersion of everyone else.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

    no WDYWN I am not saying to get rid of all regulations

    I'm glad to hear that.

    Unfortunately it doesn't look much different for you to complain about everything being over-regulated, say that that amorphous over-regulation ruined everything, and then rest on your laurels.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    or due to your unfortunate set of circumstances.



    Some people don't think social darwinism is a good model for an advanced society, particularly the richest one on the planet.

    It's always easy to resent others their "unfortunate set of circumstances." Funny enough, those doing the resenting have their hands out all the faster when they fall on hard times.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from AlleyCatBruin. Show AlleyCatBruin's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Government had already taken over health care before ACA. ACA only makes it worse. They already own the VA as actual government run health care. They provide health care insurance for everyone over 65. 

    [/QUOTE]

    You seem like the Govt should not own the VA. If not the Govt, then who should own it?You also seem like its bad that we take care of our senior citizens. I ask you again, if not the Govt, then who will take care of the medical needs of our seniors?

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    [QUOTE]or due to your unfortunate set of circumstances.[/QUOTE]


     

    Some people don't think social darwinism is a good model for an advanced society, particularly the richest one on the planet.

    It's always easy to resent others their "unfortunate set of circumstances." Funny enough, those doing the resenting have their hands out all the faster when they fall on hard times.

    [/QUOTE]

    Social darwinism?  Stretch much?

    Resentment?  Who is being resentful?  I mean, except for you, as you are being called on your redistributive philosophy.  Figures.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to AlleyCatBruin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Government had already taken over health care before ACA. ACA only makes it worse. They already own the VA as actual government run health care. They provide health care insurance for everyone over 65. 

    [/QUOTE]

    You seem like the Govt should not own the VA. If not the Govt, then who should own it?You also seem like its bad that we take care of our senior citizens. I ask you again, if not the Govt, then who will take care of the medical needs of our seniors?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Your assumption is that all vets and all seniors need the government to take care of them.  Tell me when that became the case.  

    People should take care of themselves.  This crazy standard that the liberals have that government knows better how to allocate my resources than I do is just stupid.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:


    Your assumption is that all vets and all seniors need the government to take care of them.  Tell me when that became the case.  

    People should take care of themselves.  This crazy standard that the liberals have that government knows better how to allocate my resources than I do is just stupid.




    Your obtuseness is well practiced.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to AlleyCatBruin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Government had already taken over health care before ACA. ACA only makes it worse. They already own the VA as actual government run health care. They provide health care insurance for everyone over 65. 

    [/QUOTE]

    You seem like the Govt should not own the VA. If not the Govt, then who should own it?You also seem like its bad that we take care of our senior citizens. I ask you again, if not the Govt, then who will take care of the medical needs of our seniors?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Your assumption is that all vets and all seniors need the government to take care of them.  Tell me when that became the case.  

    People should take care of themselves.  This crazy standard that the liberals have that government knows better how to allocate my resources than I do is just stupid.

    [/QUOTE]

    So you think Vets with PTSD, and seniors with dementia should be negotiating with insurance companies on their coverage?

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    Did the levee in New Orleans have a chink in it?

    geez lmao!

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    no WDYWN I am not saying to get rid of all regulations

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

    I'm glad to hear that.

    Unfortunately it doesn't look much different for you to complain about everything being over-regulated, say that that amorphous over-regulation ruined everything, and then rest on your laurels.

    [/QUOTE]


    Are you going to claim that health care and health insurance are not overly regulated?

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    Your assumption is that all vets and all seniors need the government to take care of them.  Tell me when that became the case.  

    People should take care of themselves.  This crazy standard that the liberals have that government knows better how to allocate my resources than I do is just stupid.

     

    [/QUOTE]


     

    Your obtuseness is well practiced.

    [/QUOTE]


    obtuseness

    That is SO convincing when you cut one word or phrases and make an out of context argument.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hansoribrother. Show Hansoribrother's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to miscricket's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Government had already taken over health care before ACA. ACA only makes it worse. They already own the VA as actual government run health care. They provide health care insurance for everyone over 65. They control reimbursement formulas. They over-regulate everything else via the FDA and other agencies (no WDYWN I am not saying to get rid of all regulations).

    The absence of logic on the left - government has f'd up so bad with Obamcare that we should just have the government as the sole payer.

    A novel idea: how about making the PATIENT the sole payer?? Makes too much sense and not enough people in the way to take their share.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd prefer the patient be the sole payer than this insurance nonsense.  Nobody knows what their insurance needs are, until they need it.  It's just driving up the real costs of health care.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Transparency in costs is something we should be fighting for no doubt. However, if we make the individual the sole payer then what happens when a major illness hits? More bankrupticies..etc.

    If we believe that basic health care is a right in this country then we should have universal, single payer health care. It's really that simple.

    [/QUOTE]

    Being the sole payer doesn't mean you don't have insurance. It means you pay the bill.

    Health care is not a right in this country. It cannot be a right becuase you have to force someone to serve you in order for it to be a right. There are already signs that there are not enough doctors. Then if it is a right then we will have all sorts of activists filing suits demanding equal treatment in the quality of care and the services available, etc. etc. 

    Single payer will not work here. The government has proven it is inept at handling health care insurance. Do you want to destroy the health care system? Single payer would be a good way to start. All you have to do is look at the track record of the VA, Medicare and Medicaid to know what you are asking for. 

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hansoribrother. Show Hansoribrother's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    no WDYWN I am not saying to get rid of all regulations

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

    I'm glad to hear that.

    Unfortunately it doesn't look much different for you to complain about everything being over-regulated, say that that amorphous over-regulation ruined everything, and then rest on your laurels.

    [/QUOTE]

    You are given to assuming extremes. everything?

     

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:
    [QUOTE] You are given to assuming extremes.[/QUOTE]

    Or perhaps...you are an extremist.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare


    Let me get this straight - the liberal governor andf friend of Obama from the liberal state of Massachusetts asked for a waiver and was denied by the Obama administration.

    Where's the accusations from the right about crony-capitalism and political favoritism and Chicago style politics?

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: A Chink in the Armor of Obamacare

    First, some people need to relieve themselves of the notion that basic health care is not a right we should be afforded as citizens of the U.S.

    Without this fundamental concept, the debate can never be resolved.  Either "all men are created equal", or they're not.

    We've been adapting the nation to this idea for over 200 years...for blacks, for immigrants, for women, for children... that says, 'we are only as free as the least free among us.'

    Access to health care is only the latest front in this never-ending war to decide just how "free" is freedom and whether there's enough of it to go around.

     

     

     

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share