Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

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

    Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    I don’t know if Members of Congress will be hearing about it in town hall gatherings and other meetings back home over the Fourth of July recess, but the rolling thunder of the approaching ObamaCare train can be heard in the distance. Smart Democrats are beginning to get frantic about the need to suppress the confusion and hide the cost of ObamaCare between now and the 2014 midterm elections. We are just three months away from the October 1st enrollment start date and so far, nothing about the ObamaCare implementation process should be politically encouraging for Democrats. In fact, the more people learn about ObamaCare, the more frightened they become.

    Right now, small businesses across America are making the final determinations on how to reduce the working hours of their employees so fewer employees qualify for the mandated, employer-provided health insurance. Employers are also deciding whether it makes more economic sense to pay a fine to the government or pay for healthcare benefits for their employees. What this means is that hundreds of thousands – and perhaps even millions – of Americans will learn that they are being dismissed from their employer’s healthcare coverage.

    The healthcare pink slips will start raining down in late summer and early fall. This will push people into the healthcare exchanges, where, in some cases, people will be writing health insurance checks for the first time. And in many cases, people will be facing increased health insurance costs, particularly if they are young and healthy. The negative effects on personal income and the overall economy will be undeniable. Sometime next year, before the elections, the penalties associated with not having or providing health insurance will begin to pour in. Will the fines come in the mail? Will you be able to appeal? What happens if someone doesn’t pay? No one knows. Or, no one who knows is talking. The consequences of ObamaCare are being hidden.

    Today’s Wall Street Journal article, “Health-insurance costs set for a jolt” hints at the debacle that is to come. At some point soon, it’s going to be undeniable that ObamaCare is nothing but another federal entitlement, where those who are young and healthy bear the direct cost of subsidizing those who are not.

    In midterm elections, those who vote tend to be more engaged voters. In other words, these voters will notice if they have health insurance that is more expensive but offers less coverage than what they had before ObamaCare. Some of the Democrats’ reactions will be predictable, i.e. blaming Bush and blaming Republicans, or for a while, denying the obvious. But that won’t work forever. One of the worst sins you can commit in politics is to say something that’s different from what people can see for themselves. There is no chance that Obamacare will perform as promised and when it doesn’t, voters will be looking for relief.

     

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2013/07/01/the-insiders-democrats-are-trying-to-suppress-the-confusion-and-hide-the-cost-of-obamacare/

     

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    I think the progressives hope Obamacare will fail, so they can propose yet another solution:  Government delivered health care, i.e., completely under the control of government.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    I think the progressives hope Obamacare will fail, so they can propose yet another solution:  Government delivered health care, i.e., completely under the control of government.

     




    Wouldn't it then be in conservatives interest to work with Dems to shore it up as best they can, rather than actively try to make it fail?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No.  Making it fail such that we get complete government control is marginally better than this abortion of legislation and dubious "taxation".  Why go through the pain of jacking up my costs, limiting my options, all to make me wish for a complete government take over of healthcare?  Just get it over, pull the trigger.  

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    The only thing hidden seems to be gop ideas for comprehensive reform even remotely on the scale as the ACA.  They got nothing, and they know it, which is why attack/smear/dissemble is always their default mode.

    Newsflash: going from no coverage to some coverage will always represent an "increased cost".

     

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    Newsflash: going from no coverage to some coverage will always represent an "increased cost".

     

    Tell that to those libs who've been saying increased coverage = decreased costs. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?



    Eliminating the health insurance industry = decreased cost.

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to UserName99's comment:



    Eliminating the health insurance industry = decreased cost.



    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:



    Wouldn't it then be in conservatives interest to work with Dems to shore it up as best they can, rather than actively try to make it fail?




    How can they "actively make it fail"?

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    The only thing hidden seems to be gop ideas for comprehensive reform even remotely on the scale as the ACA.  They got nothing, and they know it, which is why attack/smear/dissemble is always their default mode.

    Newsflash: going from no coverage to some coverage will always represent an "increased cost".

     



    Then it should have been presented that way!!! And not lied about to get it through

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to UserName99's comment:

     



    Eliminating the health insurance industry = decreased cost.

     



    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

     




    As a member of the medical-industrial-complex, I knew you'd like that.

     

     

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    The only thing hidden seems to be gop ideas for comprehensive reform even remotely on the scale as the ACA.  They got nothing, and they know it, which is why attack/smear/dissemble is always their default mode.

    Newsflash: going from no coverage to some coverage will always represent an "increased cost".

     



    That's rubbish. They presented plenty of plans. Just because you don't like them, that doesn't mean they weren't presented.

    Newsflash: We were promised that this would lower costs. In fact the President gave us some numbers too.  Anyone with a brain knows they were bogus, just a bunch of lies to help sell the program.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to UserName99's comment:



    Eliminating the health insurance industry = decreased cost.



    Somehow, I don't think we are getting throug to you.

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to UserName99's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to UserName99's comment:

     



    Eliminating the health insurance industry = decreased cost.

     



    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

     

     




     

    As a member of the medical-industrial-complex, I knew you'd like that.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Always appreciate a good laugh. Thanks!

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    Newsflash: going from no coverage to some coverage will always represent an "increased cost".

     

    Tell that to those libs who've been saying increased coverage = decreased costs. 



    Except nobody is saying that.

    Increased enrollment leads to decreased costs.

     

     

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    The only thing hidden seems to be gop ideas for comprehensive reform even remotely on the scale as the ACA.  They got nothing, and they know it, which is why attack/smear/dissemble is always their default mode.

    Newsflash: going from no coverage to some coverage will always represent an "increased cost".

     

     



    That's rubbish. They presented plenty of plans. Just because you don't like them, that doesn't mean they weren't presented.

     

    Newsflash: We were promised that this would lower costs. In fact the President gave us some numbers too.  Anyone with a brain knows they were bogus, just a bunch of lies to help sell the program.

    [/QUOTE]

    They presented band-aids and stopgaps...little of significance and even less to help control costs.  Because how can they pretend to want to control costs when they think the free market will do it (which it hasn't).

    It will indeed lower costs over time.  Hence the concept of cost projection, as the CBO and others have reported.  Repeal will undoubtably raise the deficit.

    I won't deny they've done a poor job selling reform (which is too weak to begin with), but it's still better than the status quo and better than anything put up by the gop.  True reform would have gone much farther, but the gopers weren't interested...all they wanted was to shut down the prez.  This is the field they've sown, for better or worse.

     

     

     

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    They presented plenty of plans.

     



    Such as?

     

    McCain proposed a tax credit in 2008 debates. If memory serves it was $5000, rendering it meaningless by 2011.

     

     

     

    The problem critics of Obamacare are facing is that they can't articulate a way to reduce actual health care costs - the amount insurers bargain to pay providers for particular service. What are you going to do, set absolute price controls?

    This is why every other developped country has gone to some kind of single payer. It's the only system that lets costs be dealt with on a uniform basis.

    As it stands, the same procedure costs widlly different amounts depending on which particular provider who performs it. Obamacare doesn't do anything about that. Nothing Republicans proposed do anything about that.

     

    The only thing Obamacare can do is try to lower premiums (and they have grown more slowly since it passed) and get more people covered, thereby - hopefully - leading to more preventative care while stopping people from gaming the system.

     

     

     

    If Obamacare is so awful, why can't ANYONE here who criticizes it articulate a specific alternate plan and why it would work.

    A few people have shouted "free market" without explanation. Well, yippee.

     

     

     

    Does anyone have any solid critiques? It's sounding more like "bush lied, people died" every day.

    [/QUOTE]

    Try googling "Paul Ryan health care plan".  You will get plenty. I bet if  you googled some other names  or maybe some conservative think tanks in the same manner you'd get plenty of content to dismiss and pretend that no one offers alternatives.

    You write:

    "As it stands, the same procedure costs widlly different amounts depending on which particular provider who performs it. Obamacare doesn't do anything about that. Nothing Republicans proposed do anything about that."

    How do you know? I thought there was no alternative proposed? How can you make that claim when there clearly are alternatives and you are just too lazy to find them?

    All that aside, our healthcare system is just a big ole mess and adding Obamacare on top of it is not going to make it better.

    If you have to deal the the health care industry, you know that it is run by government regulations. Yeah, the government doesn't own it but they might as well because they regulate it to death. 

    Try reading up on how Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements are determined. It will make your hair hurt it is so stupid.

    I will give you one thing for sure. I have not heard any serious argument for greatly reducing the role of government in health care.  I don't think even the Republicans are that interested in it. 

    All that said a reason healthcare is so expensive here is that no one makes money by preventing disease. That is up to indivudual behaviors. And we would rather take a pill to control something rather than skip the pill and modify the behavior. Pills make money. What they call "preventive care" is really early detection. So the industry wants you to behave in an unhealthy manner so they can test you to make sure you are OK until the test is positive andn then they can fix you up. Real preventive care is a money loser. Stop eating junk. Stop smoking. Start moving, etc. Can't make anything on that except maybe some DVDs to peddle on a PBS begathon.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Newsflash: going from no coverage to some coverage will always represent an "increased cost".

     

    Tell that to those libs who've been saying increased coverage = decreased costs. 

     



    Except nobody is saying that.

     

    Increased enrollment leads to decreased costs.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Increased coverage as in more people covered as in increased enrollment. Still doesn't always translate to decreased costs especially at the beginning....as you so pointed out in another post.

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    They presented plenty of plans.

     



    Such as?

     

    McCain proposed a tax credit in 2008 debates. If memory serves it was $5000, rendering it meaningless by 2011.

     

     

     

    The problem critics of Obamacare are facing is that they can't articulate a way to reduce actual health care costs - the amount insurers bargain to pay providers for particular service. What are you going to do, set absolute price controls?

    This is why every other developped country has gone to some kind of single payer. It's the only system that lets costs be dealt with on a uniform basis.

    As it stands, the same procedure costs widlly different amounts depending on which particular provider who performs it. Obamacare doesn't do anything about that. Nothing Republicans proposed do anything about that.

     

    The only thing Obamacare can do is try to lower premiums (and they have grown more slowly since it passed) and get more people covered, thereby - hopefully - leading to more preventative care while stopping people from gaming the system.

     

     

     

    If Obamacare is so awful, why can't ANYONE here who criticizes it articulate a specific alternate plan and why it would work.

    A few people have shouted "free market" without explanation. Well, yippee.

     

     

     

    Does anyone have any solid critiques? It's sounding more like "bush lied, people died" every day.

    [/QUOTE]


    "The problem critics of Obamacare are facing is that they can't articulate a way to reduce actual health care costs "

    Simply not true and not necessarily the right question.

    In answer to the cost issue, being able to sell insurance across state lines, high deductible plans, reducing regulation, all have a better potential of lowering costs than Obamacare.

    But, it still may not be the proper question.  Is cost the issue?  Is access the issue? is covering the poor the issue?  Progressives are all over the map as to WHY we need Obamacare.

    As far as the cost question,  I maintain that it is the wrong question.  I think is is a fools errand in a time where health care options are expanding dramatically to focus on costs.  these new techniques and capabilities are costly, but they save lives.  So, do you want a cheap doctor visit for a cold, or a well-honed heart transplant capability?  The Obamacare answer seems to be the former, and the free market seems to want the latter.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

     

     



    And here's what you needed: Evidence

     

     

     

    Obama Administration to Delay Health Law Requirement Until 2015

    WASHINGTON — The Obama administration announced on Tuesday it would delay for a year, until 2015, the Affordable Care Act mandate that employers provide coverage for their workers or pay penalties, responding to business complaints and postponing the effective date beyond next year’s midterm elections.

    “We have heard concerns about the complexity of the requirements and the need for more time to implement them effectively,” Mark J. Mazur, an assistant Treasury secretary, wrote on the department’s Web site in disclosing the delay. “We recognize that the vast majority of businesses that will need to do this reporting already provide health insurance to their workers, and we want to make sure it is easy for others to do so.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/03/us/politics/obama-administration-to-delay-health-law-requirement-until-2015.html?hp&_r=0

     

     

     

    Now that does sound like punting.

    [/QUOTE]


    Strange that this supposedly comprehensive health care plan is not lowering costs or improving care.  If it was, Democrats would be clamoring to use it as their main platform for re-election.  instead, they are running from it.

    If Bohner doesn't use this opportunity to seize control of the health care agenda and defund Obamacare, all hope is lost.  We will delay past the next election, then the jack-booted healthcare thugs from the federal government will be right back at it, stripping our freedoms and our pocketbooks.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:
    [QUOTE]"Paul Ryan health care plan".

     

     



    Is not a plan. Cutting 2.72 trillion from Medicare, Medicaid, and any Obamacare funding is not a health care plan, it's a budget austerity plan. It isn't designed to fix the problem of actual health care costs OR reduce premium rates.

     

     

    He wants a 2.3k and 5.7k tax exemption for individuals to purchase their own insurance, and gets rid of the employer-based health care.

    The individual market has always been WAY more expensive than employer plans because individuals have zero bargaining power. Obamacare aims to fix that with exchanges. Ryan just wants a piddling tax exemption that will get swallowed up within one or two years of rate increases!

    Getting rid of the employer exemption would lead to more employers dropping coverage than anything they've claimed about Obamacare.

    Ryan purports to allow voluntary exchanges, but those exchanges have no bargaining power: They can't set/negotiate premiums, co-pays, deductibles, anything. ALL they do is prevent insurers from refusing to sell a plan.

     

     

    In short: the Ryan plan dumps everyone into the individual market, but then deprives exchanges of the ability to actually negotiate a group rate for individuals.

    I was once temporarily on an individual plan. I was in absolute perfect health, with virtually no bad family history. $400/month.

    I paid the first $10,000 of health care expenses a year. They covered from 10k to 2m.

    $400/m for a catastrophic plan.

    Just what do you think an individual family rate for a plan with some coverage of doctor's visits/prescriptions/etc, for a family with at least one sick individual, would be...if my bare-bones catastrophic was $400 m.

     

     

    You've got to be drunk, stoned, and seriously twisted to think that's an improvement over Obamacare.

    There are no Republican proposals. Don't call me lazy if you haven't even bothered to think about the Ryan plan's effect. You just like it because he's a conservative and he told you it's good.

    [/QUOTE]

    Just because your ears are blocked or wadded up with socialist propaganda does not allow you to lie.  There are other proposals out there. 

    My take is thatthey are all bad.  the direction we should be heading with health care is AWAY for neat government plans that promise this constituency or that constituency "free" or "subsidized" healthcare, towards personal responsibility with a minimal safety net for the truly needy.

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

     

    [QUOTE] 

     

     

     

    They presented plenty of plans.

     

     

     



    Such as?

     

     

     

    McCain proposed a tax credit in 2008 debates. If memory serves it was $5000, rendering it meaningless by 2011.

     

     

     

    The problem critics of Obamacare are facing is that they can't articulate a way to reduce actual health care costs - the amount insurers bargain to pay providers for particular service. What are you going to do, set absolute price controls?

    This is why every other developped country has gone to some kind of single payer. It's the only system that lets costs be dealt with on a uniform basis.

    As it stands, the same procedure costs widlly different amounts depending on which particular provider who performs it. Obamacare doesn't do anything about that. Nothing Republicans proposed do anything about that.

     

    The only thing Obamacare can do is try to lower premiums (and they have grown more slowly since it passed) and get more people covered, thereby - hopefully - leading to more preventative care while stopping people from gaming the system.

     

     

     

    If Obamacare is so awful, why can't ANYONE here who criticizes it articulate a specific alternate plan and why it would work.

    A few people have shouted "free market" without explanation. Well, yippee.

     

     

     

    Does anyone have any solid critiques? It's sounding more like "bush lied, people died" every day.

     

     


     

     

    Try googling "Paul Ryan health care plan".  You will get plenty. I bet if  you googled some other names  or maybe some conservative think tanks in the same manner you'd get plenty of content to dismiss and pretend that no one offers alternatives.

    You write:

    "As it stands, the same procedure costs widlly different amounts depending on which particular provider who performs it. Obamacare doesn't do anything about that. Nothing Republicans proposed do anything about that."

    How do you know? I thought there was no alternative proposed? How can you make that claim when there clearly are alternatives and you are just too lazy to find them?

    All that aside, our healthcare system is just a big ole mess and adding Obamacare on top of it is not going to make it better.

    If you have to deal the the health care industry, you know that it is run by government regulations. Yeah, the government doesn't own it but they might as well because they regulate it to death. 

    Try reading up on how Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements are determined. It will make your hair hurt it is so stupid.

    I will give you one thing for sure. I have not heard any serious argument for greatly reducing the role of government in health care.  I don't think even the Republicans are that interested in it. 

    All that said a reason healthcare is so expensive here is that no one makes money by preventing disease. That is up to indivudual behaviors. And we would rather take a pill to control something rather than skip the pill and modify the behavior. Pills make money. What they call "preventive care" is really early detection. So the industry wants you to behave in an unhealthy manner so they can test you to make sure you are OK until the test is positive andn then they can fix you up. Real preventive care is a money loser. Stop eating junk. Stop smoking. Start moving, etc. Can't make anything on that except maybe some DVDs to peddle on a PBS begathon.

     

     

     




     

     

    You are a funny guy. Lost in your ideological ignorance but funny none the less.

    Let's see, Ryan's healthcare plan..... what are the key points.....

    1. Preventing Disease and Promoting Healthier Lifestyles;

    Ooooh freaking ground breaking that is. That's about as much as a no-brainer for the no-brainers as you can get. Heck Michelle's got that covered all by herself.

    2. Creating Affordable and Accessible Health Insurance Options- Creates State Health Insurance Exchanges;

    Now where have I heard that before, it sounds awful familiar... and not in a new and different way either ... just in a "deja vu all over again" echo type of way.

    3. Equalizes the Tax Treatment of Health Care, Empowering All Americans with Real Access to Coverage; Economic analysts across the political divide agree that the tax code is stacked in favor of the wealthy....

    Hmmmmm can you say "Cadillac health plans"?

     

    Yada, yada, yada...

    The key points from boy-Robin are EXACTLY the same provisions as in ACA and yet the wingnuts continue to tilt at their imaginary windmills, oblivious of reality.

    The only reason the 'knutes keep fighting ACA is because it was... gawd forbid.... written and passed by the Dems.... ohhh the horror.

    [/QUOTE]

    Like I said, alternatives have been proposed.  And like I said if you found it you would dismiss it..

    So the problem isn't that no alternative has been proposed. You just hadn't bothered to look into it, you just wanted to mouth off.

     

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE] 

     

     

     

     

    They presented plenty of plans.

     

     

     



    Such as?

     

     

     

    McCain proposed a tax credit in 2008 debates. If memory serves it was $5000, rendering it meaningless by 2011.

     

     

     

    The problem critics of Obamacare are facing is that they can't articulate a way to reduce actual health care costs - the amount insurers bargain to pay providers for particular service. What are you going to do, set absolute price controls?

    This is why every other developped country has gone to some kind of single payer. It's the only system that lets costs be dealt with on a uniform basis.

    As it stands, the same procedure costs widlly different amounts depending on which particular provider who performs it. Obamacare doesn't do anything about that. Nothing Republicans proposed do anything about that.

     

    The only thing Obamacare can do is try to lower premiums (and they have grown more slowly since it passed) and get more people covered, thereby - hopefully - leading to more preventative care while stopping people from gaming the system.

     

     

     

    If Obamacare is so awful, why can't ANYONE here who criticizes it articulate a specific alternate plan and why it would work.

    A few people have shouted "free market" without explanation. Well, yippee.

     

     

     

    Does anyone have any solid critiques? It's sounding more like "bush lied, people died" every day.

     

     

     

     

     

    Try googling "Paul Ryan health care plan".  You will get plenty. I bet if  you googled some other names  or maybe some conservative think tanks in the same manner you'd get plenty of content to dismiss and pretend that no one offers alternatives.

    You write:

    "As it stands, the same procedure costs widlly different amounts depending on which particular provider who performs it. Obamacare doesn't do anything about that. Nothing Republicans proposed do anything about that."

    How do you know? I thought there was no alternative proposed? How can you make that claim when there clearly are alternatives and you are just too lazy to find them?

    All that aside, our healthcare system is just a big ole mess and adding Obamacare on top of it is not going to make it better.

    If you have to deal the the health care industry, you know that it is run by government regulations. Yeah, the government doesn't own it but they might as well because they regulate it to death. 

    Try reading up on how Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements are determined. It will make your hair hurt it is so stupid.

    I will give you one thing for sure. I have not heard any serious argument for greatly reducing the role of government in health care.  I don't think even the Republicans are that interested in it. 

    All that said a reason healthcare is so expensive here is that no one makes money by preventing disease. That is up to indivudual behaviors. And we would rather take a pill to control something rather than skip the pill and modify the behavior. Pills make money. What they call "preventive care" is really early detection. So the industry wants you to behave in an unhealthy manner so they can test you to make sure you are OK until the test is positive andn then they can fix you up. Real preventive care is a money loser. Stop eating junk. Stop smoking. Start moving, etc. Can't make anything on that except maybe some DVDs to peddle on a PBS begathon.

     

     

     

     

     




     

     

    You are a funny guy. Lost in your ideological ignorance but funny none the less.

    Let's see, Ryan's healthcare plan..... what are the key points.....

    1. Preventing Disease and Promoting Healthier Lifestyles;

    Ooooh freaking ground breaking that is. That's about as much as a no-brainer for the no-brainers as you can get. Heck Michelle's got that covered all by herself.

    2. Creating Affordable and Accessible Health Insurance Options- Creates State Health Insurance Exchanges;

    Now where have I heard that before, it sounds awful familiar... and not in a new and different way either ... just in a "deja vu all over again" echo type of way.

    3. Equalizes the Tax Treatment of Health Care, Empowering All Americans with Real Access to Coverage; Economic analysts across the political divide agree that the tax code is stacked in favor of the wealthy....

    Hmmmmm can you say "Cadillac health plans"?

     

    Yada, yada, yada...

    The key points from boy-Robin are EXACTLY the same provisions as in ACA and yet the wingnuts continue to tilt at their imaginary windmills, oblivious of reality.

    The only reason the 'knutes keep fighting ACA is because it was... gawd forbid.... written and passed by the Dems.... ohhh the horror.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Like I said, alternatives have been proposed.  And like I said if you found it you would dismiss it..

     

    So the problem isn't that no alternative has been proposed. You just hadn't bothered to look into it, you just wanted to mouth off.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Alternatives have been proposed on both sides - remember the public option?  

    Republicans controlled congress for 12 years - from 1995 to 2007.  Health care costs and premiums doubled during that time.  Where were the Republican alternatives then?  You think congressional Republicans get to sit on their hands for 12 years, but as soon as there's actual movement on an issue, the ideas of the majority should be swept aside in favor of those who stayed silent for so long?  

    Besides all that, it's a lie.  When push came to shove, the Republican Mantra was "start over" and "push the reset button".  They were never interested in changing he status quo - just hoping to stall until the mid-terms.

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    No they're not hiding it, they just don't want all the dopes who voted for this clown to see the big picture until after the next congressional elections.

    You have to read it to know what's in it.

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

    Re: Are dems hiding the real costs of the ACA?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    This. 

    And of course, Obamacare is basically a collection of Republican ideas from the time just before they started sitting on their hands. 

    But let's not pay attention to any of that. It's all those socialist Re...  Democrats.




    Then why did dems (Harry Reid and Pelosi) not even allow debate on the floor for amendments brought by the otherside repeatedly?

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share