by LauraLoo
From the The Heritage Foundation comes a great video on debunking the defunding myths of Obamacare:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuTFC-0lMXU[/youtube]
Email dailyvid@jillstanek.com with your video suggestions.
[HT: Ben Howe]
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I’m still waiting for the ‘great’ part?!?
Cute video though. Stupid idea, but cute video.
Defund Obamacare. It can and would work. Any GOP member of congress who does not vote to defund Obamacare should run as a DemocRAT.
Agreed. They should leave the dark ages of the GOP and step into the present.
Ex-RINO, why did the Obama administration waive the employer mandate to offer health care coverage but leave the individual mandate in place? How does that help the average guy keep his insurance? In fact, how does it help the average guy at all?
< this is where Ex-RINO does one of three things…. either he attacks me or deflects or goes silent>
Ex-RINO, why did the Obama administration take the side of insurance companies and waive the implementation of mandatory out-of-pocet expense caps thatwere written into Obamacare to protect individuals by keeping insurance affordable?
<ditto>
Question 1: Ex-RINO, why did the Obama administration waive the employer mandate to offer health care coverage but leave the individual mandate in place?
– Kind of about three questions in one here – but let me hit on it as best i can for you. First off, it’s unbelievably key to understand that the two mandates are NOT related. In fact, Maggie Mahar, when Boehner tried to link the two suggested that he was either an idiot, or was trying to mislead people. The simple answer was that the employer mandate was delayed because it doesn’t affect many people, and it gives times for more education so that it isn’t a reporting burden on companies that do offer insurance (the vast majority). The individual mandate is not delayed because states are on track, and delaying it will cause a delay in the elimination of pre-existing conditions. If you need me to explain how the two aren’t related, let me know.
Question 2 – How does that help the average guy keep his insurance.
Companies that already offer insurance, which again is the vast majority, see the average guy that has insurance through his employer will continue to have insurance. Those who work at a place that don’t offer insurance could be affected (because it is a year more until they must offer insurance, or good enough insurance) – but those people can now buy insurance off the exchanges are receive pretty strong subsidies (since most of these folks are lower paid full time workers – restaurants are the primary employer type that doesn’t offer insurance, or good insurance, to employees).
Question 3 – In fact, how does it help the average guy at all
I hope the answer in #2 helps – the average guy is untouched by this. If you want to define a different definition of average (since the majority of Americans receive insurance through work) – let me know.
Question 4 – Why did the Obama administration take the side of insurance companies and waive the implementation of mandatory out-of-pocet expense caps thatwere written into Obamacare to protect individuals by keeping insurance affordable?
First off, this shouldn’t be a surprise – the complexity of this issue is so great they talked about delaying things about 6 months prior – and it finally came true. I don’t think you understand though that this isn’t all caps.
The law, as written, says that the max is supposed to be $6350 for an individual, twice that for a family. Some employers have always made this even higher by having other companies manage other components of a plan – so medical is a coverage, and prescription is another coverage, doubling the amount. So ONLY EMPLOYERS WHO HAVE DONE THAT have another year to get their plans consolidated and reporting in line – everyone one will have that new law in effect. Furthermore, those companies with the delay will have to adhere to the max for major medical stuff (so things like cancer or hospitalization coverage can’t be separated – but dental or vision still can be).
So not much of a change really.
All questions answered – thanks for playing.
Here we go again…
JDC – Ha – you know I’m always up for talking health care!
Funny that. You comment regularly on a pro-life blog, yet rarely talk about abortion.
Lrning – ask me anything you want on abortion.
I thought, during the health care debate, that a big opportunity existed to make universal care happen, with banned abortion funding (since care would be guaranteed for all, but you can say what isn’t care). I thought that would be a great way to try to curb abortion rates.
Instead, the fighting between the parties isn’t helping anything – I mean, it appears the GOP just made it possible for public funds to be used for a congressional staffer to buy abortion coverage…lovely work guys.
“ask me anything you want on abortion”
I have nothing to ask you. I just find it curious that you comment regularly on a pro-life blog but limit your comments almost exclusively to non-abortion related politics.
I don’t find it curious at all – I don’t have much to add on a lot of it. I’m just not the type who does a lot of posts “yes, I agree with this”.
Plus, there aren’t a whole lot of great conversations regarding how to approach society and abortion – most of the abortion posts on this board are “look how bad obama is”, or “look how about this celebrity is” – not a whole lot of posts that lead to good conversation regarding the nature of abortion, why it is found in such numbers here (in the US), and how to realisitically combat it. That sort of stuff I’m interested in – the bandwagon bashing of people and organizations – that just isn’t really of interst to me.
I mean, if the pro-life crowd thinks that the cause willl be advanced by collectively hating Ashley Judd more – I mean, what should I even add to that conversation?
So yeah – I don’t find it curious at all.
What I do find curious is that a group so devoted to banning abortion works pretty hard to mark their tent more and more narrow – some of the folks on this board are pretty unwelcoming, condescending, unloving, and look for any certain opportunity to alienate anybody who doesn’t 100% agree with every component of their belief (which, extends way beyond just abortion – watch any coversations with Jack…)
That’s what I find curious.
Man…you popped the lid of some feelings I’ve had for quite a while now. Yikes!
Hope all is well…
First off, it’s unbelievably key to understand that the two mandates are NOT related. In fact, Maggie Mahar, when Boehner tried to link the two suggested that he was either an idiot, or was trying to mislead people.
Ex-RINO, what am I supposed to say to person whose mind is so obtuse that they claim a mandate forcing employees’ to buy health insurance is NOT at all related related to removing an employer’s mandate to sell insurance to employees. Liberals sometimes have trouble understanding anything unless you can help them see it from a personal perspective. If you worked for somebody who decided drop health insurance for their employees next year; would you see how that have direct consequences on the employees who are required to carry health insurance? I hear it is happening to a LOT of people.
Up above when I said you would do one of three things I left off the fourth way you could respond…..with complete nonsense.
“Companies that already offer insurance, which again is the vast majority, see the average guy that has insurance through his employer will continue to have insurance.”
And pay no attention to the 100,000 in New Jersey alone who work for employers that gave them insurance last year but will no longer offer insurance to them this year. Ex-RINO, how to you keep any self respect?
truth -
Given your history of completely botching even basic health care concepts, I wouldn’t call anybody else obtuse.
The INDIVIDUAL Mandate relates to the general marketplace – those not covered by employer insurance. The basic theory goes, if you are going to get rid of things like caps and pre-existing conditions, you need more people to participate to defray costs. Furthermore, because of personal responsibility, we don’t want to promote freeloaders. So the INDIVIDUAL mandate is for those buying insurance in the general market.
The EMPLOYER Mandate has to do with employers maintaining certain coverage.
It is TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT POOLS.
Maggie Mahar, who has forgotten 10 times the amount either of us will ever know on health care policy, has a great post on it:
http://www.healthbeatblog.com/2013/07/boehner-asks-why-a-break-for-businesses-only/
Not related, and to suggest so is to completely plead ignorance as to the general marketplace and employer coverage.
I keep self respect by understanding the facts, which you don’t. The 100K in New Jersey has NOTHING to do with employer health care. New Jersey, for years, has allowed bare bones plans. You can’t have these anymore, so plans that 100K people took advantage of are now gone. They bought these on the INDIVIDUAL market, so when you say “employers”, you are either not understanding, or lying (please clarify).
These people will NOT be without insurance – they will buy insurance through exchanges, just like tons of other people.
How you do you keep any self respect lying all the time? Or do you want to plead ignorance?
This article specifically points out these weren’t employer plans:
http://www.nj.com/business/index.ssf/2013/08/affordable_care_act_to_end_hea.html
OK Ex-RINO, how do you manage to disregard that so many companies are choosing to drop employee health insurance coverage next year. Is that the same trick that enables you to unread my posts? Everybody is aware, for example, that UPS is dropping coverage for their employees next year because Obamacare has the cost of health insurance skyrocketing. Yet you somehow not only disregard that in your own mind; but you will actually go around on blogs like this trying to convince other people that these UPS employers were not covered by employee health care. Sheesh
I guess I forgot to mention an option #5. You could go from nonsense to just responding with bold-faced lies.
“(please clarify).”
Do you find it easy to disregard how ‘your’ health care nirvana is screwing with all these other peoples lives. What do you say about all those employees who work in the service industry for both large and small businesses? The ones who are getting their hours cut back below 30 hours a week and getting dropped off their employer insurance rolls.
And an unemployment explosion from Obamacare is coming down the pike. The former CEO of McDonalds says that Obamacare is going to kill 20% of small businesses in the next few years:
http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/2439346090001/former-mcdonalds-ceo-obamacare-will-kill-20-of-small-biz/
“Everybody is aware, for example, that UPS is dropping coverage for their employees next year because Obamacare has the cost of health insurance skyrocketing. ”
Not dropping it completely but removing the spousal coverage for some 15k employees.
So I’m assuming you are just going to ignore questions 1-4, in which I easily answered, and which you lied in. Lovely.
Let’s continue though.
Big lie by truthseeker number 2 in this thread – UPS is not dropping insurance for employees – they are dropping insurance for spouses if spouses can get insurance from their own job, which many, many employers already do.
You know the difference between and employee and their spouse, right?
So – lie number one:
– New Jersey has 100K more people without insurance
– UPS is dropping insurance
Again, or are you pleading ignorance?
I guess I forgot to mention an option #5. You could go from nonsense to just responding with bold-faced lies. – See more at: https://www.jillstanek.com/2013/08/137863/#comment-463088
What bold face lie? Point it out, back it up.
I see you corrected your UPS one – so those folks will all still have coverage – thanks for acknowledging.
On your “nirvana’ post.
This is where I think the GOP is really screwing up the country.
We have a law that was passed by congress and validated by the Supreme Court. So let’s now work together to refine the law in these areas where there are issues. When Social Security, Medicare, the Patriot Act, and all other big laws were passed, there were years of tinkering with the law to get rid of unintended consequences. The GOP though seems to be rooting for people to be hurt by the law to help their popularity – which I think is BS.
Now, to answer the McDonalds question though, I’d like to ask you a fundamental question about health care and what you believe. Do you believe that in America, we should support a system in which health care is provided by employers? Should we build that system up, or tear it down?
When I know your feelings on that, I can answer the McDonalds question.
You also owe me a post in regards to where I lied.
And you also need to acknowledge that you either understand that the employer mandate and the individual mandate are in two different marketplaces – or back up your thoughts regarding why they are not.
Your lie comes in when you use your liberal mind-bending to say that dropping the mandate for employers having to offer their employees health insurance has no relationship to the mandate that individuals carry health insurance. It is two different decisions but to keep denying that one does not impact the other is ‘mind-bending’ to the point of being a lie. Own it.
“So – lie number one:
– New Jersey has 100K more people without insurance”
While it is true that these people will not be losing their insurance due to the dropping of the employer mandate. It is certainly not a lie that those 100k people in New Jersey will be losing their insurance due to Obamacare mandates. Own it.
“Now, to answer the McDonalds question though, I’d like to ask you a fundamental question about health care and what you believe. Do you believe that in America, we should support a system in which health care is provided by employers?”
It is a terrible injustice that an estimated 20% of small businesses could lose their profit margins and go under as collateral damage of a health care nirvana that only exists in your mind. Own it.
Sorry to interject myself here but I only have one rhetorical question: would the big O participate in his creation? I think those that have gotten to know the big O, have seen how he promoted public schools and yet enrolled his daughters in a private one. Newsflash Ex – majority of the pols behind this “initiative” in Washington won’t practice what they preach. The big O is a hypocrite whose policies will hurt the average citizen more than you can imagine. This is exactly the reason the big O and his minions are backtracking…
The so-called average (already on insurance) person IS affected. Even those who already are covered are going to see (and some are already seeing this) increase in how much they have to pay for the coverage they were already getting. (I know people who have already verified their cost of Insurance is going up drastically–even for coverage they were already receiving!)
My older female relative went in for her regular colonscopy (which she gets because of a history of cancer on her side of the family) was informed that if she lied and was getting the procedure done “too early” she may have to pay for the whole thing herself. This relative’s idea of a good time is NOT getting this done, and she only gets it done when it’s time. She said there are things she’d much RATHER be doing than getting a colonscopy and if she didn’t have to, she wouldn’t be. However, due to Obamacare, the doctor’s office had to tell her that.
My husband works in the healthcare industry and says his job is going to be negatively affected (I don’t remember all the details, but there was a whole list–including what they could do–and they already have tight regulations as it is).
This is just a few examples of how people are being NEGATIVELY affected by Obamacare. Some of them are “average person” and STILL seeing a negative affect.
And if Obamacare is SO helpful, why are congress members opting out of it? If it’s the end all be all savior of healthcare and insurance, shouldn’t they want to jump on the bandwagon and back up their own policies?
Thanks to Obamacare, a wife can be denied coverage on her husbands policy. This doesn’t effect me directly because my wife is a SAHM. But I have friends who are mad as hell because now their family is being forced onto two policies instead of one. Think about that. Obamacare is forcing a husband and a wife to use different doctors/medical facilities than their spouses and their children use. And it would mean a whole nother deductible that this family would pay out of pocket each year. And at the same time the Obama administration waived the cap the insurance companies could charge in out-of-pocket expenses. This is a huge and unsustainable increase in medical costs for these families. Ex-RINO – own it!
Thomas R –
The fact that Obama sent his daughters to private school instead of public is like, less than an argument. Fact is, rich people have been getting “better” than the rest of us forever. Obama didn’t start it, and it doesn’t mean anything about public education that his daughters go to private school other than rich people like to get what’s prestigious and maybe the best.
Same goes for the “omg Congresspeople are going to opt out of Obamacare!!” And I’ve yet to see anyone post sources, reliable sources, when they claim that Congress is “opting out” of Obamacare. Lol. I’ve seen things that say the exact opposite though.
Again I’ll add my usual disclaimer that I don’t like Obama, I’m not a satanic communist or whatever, I just think some arguments that people use are completely illogical.
Your lie comes in when you use your liberal mind-bending to say that dropping the mandate for employers having to offer their employees health insurance has no relationship to the mandate that individuals carry health insurance. It is two different decisions but to keep denying that one does not impact the other is ‘mind-bending’ to the point of being a lie. Own it.
Own what? That is terrible, terrible reasoning. You essentially are saying they are related because, well, you think so.
I think what we have here is somebody who doesn’t understand health care (remember our conversations where you didn’t understand medicare vs medicaid), and now are embarrassed by your mistake.
I posted an article that clearly laid out why the two aren’t related. I’ll try some more here.
The EMPLOYER mandate has to do with the basic belief that in America, we support a system in which employers provide coverage for employees. The mandate is specific to what sort of plans to provide.
The INDIVIDUAL mandate is saying that people can’t be freeloaders and should pay into the system for care.
An individual who is mandated can’t go to an employer and say “let me unto your plan”. They are TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF PLANS. They aren’t related at all, and to think they are shows such alarming ignorance of the topic that it pretty much yields anything else you say moot.
truth – Your New Jersey post is akin to saying that McDonalds discontinued the McRib, so therefore hundreds of thousands will go hungry.
I’ll own my knowledge and logic – but I’m not going to own the garbage you are passing off as reasoning.
Second time I’ll ask you the question:
Now, to answer the McDonalds question though, I’d like to ask you a fundamental question about health care and what you believe. Do you believe that in America, we should support a system in which health care is provided by employers?”
Thomas R – if you want to post something of substance, I’ll be more than welcome to participate. I mean, I don’t even know what you are suggesting – health care reform affects the entire industry. Are you saying that Obama should buy his insurance on an exchange? Are you saying he should get preventative care that now must be covered? It’s odd for you to say he should participate, when anybody in the health care market is participating. What part of the law are you even talking about?
It’s like saying “if he really believed in the patriot act, he should participate”. Ummmm, we’re all affected.
Mother in Texas -
Some people in healthcare should be hurt by it – for instance, when you have health insurance companies that in some states, have paid $.60 of every dollar they take in towards actual care – they should be hurt by it.
And yes, some people will be negatively affected, and many more will be positively affected. If you can point to a law that had no negative effects, please let me know.
I would like to know though if you believe a family that has a baby with huge medical issues should face the loss of their home because they had the kid. Or if somebody from cancer should be able to simply be kicked off a plan, and denied medical care until they are on their deathbed. Is that fair?
truth
You truly are in WAY over your head.
Health care, for years, has allowed companies to say that if a spouse can get covered that the company can deny them onto their plan. And you’ve, at least in the past, supported a plan whose goal was to get people off of employer insurance – so how can you say that you want people off of employer coverage, and now complain if people have some inconveniences with their employer coverage. How odd for you to reason that.
Or do you still not know what you support?
Truth:
Keep up the good work my friend! But a word to the wise: Mary tried to reason with ex and he would have none of it. She spoke with more authority on the matter than anyone here as she was (is) a lifetime health care professional and knows how things really work.
The video was good but not entirely convincing…king obama will simply rearrange the spending priorities. If we had a fair and balanced media that would report objectively that would be one thing, but that is not going to happen. The task ahead of us should be on winning both houses of congress in 2014, and on that we have a real chance.
Jerry
If somebody tries to convince me of something with lies, bad information, or terrible logic – I won’t be convinced.
Truth doesn’t even know what he supports in health care. I doubt you do either. People on this board, when it comes to health care, just like to complain. The majority don’t understand the complexities. The GOPers around her just want free stuff and an unsustainable system, and don’t want to add five minutes of wait time if it means somebody else might not die of cancer.
Lovely crowd around here.
”Truth -Your New Jersey post is akin to saying that McDonalds discontinued the McRib, so therefore hundreds of thousands will go hungry.”
Have another drink. Wallow in your no lifetime cap and your contraception and keeping your kids on the plan till age 26. But it does necessarily cause the cost of health insurance to skyrocket. The costs are getting offset no just by the taxpayers but also by charging employers more to provide health care for their employees. Anybody who argues (like you do) that Obamacare is lowering the cost of a health insurance policy is either rationally challenged or a liar. I try not call names so I usually just refer to it as liberal mind-bending.
I’ll own my knowledge and logic – but I’m not going to own the garbage you are passing off as reasoning. – See more at: https://www.jillstanek.com/2013/08/137863/#sthash.OQ32zhEK.dpuf
Jerry,
The same people who support Obamacare are the ones who pretend that we can subsidize the cost of millions of peoples insurance and raise the benefits for everybody else while lowering the cost of health insurance policys for everyone. It is similar in many ways to the people who support abortion and their belief that the baby is not a person until he/she passes through the birth canal past their neck.
We can at least hope that our posts will other people can see through their facade.
“Health care, for years, has allowed companies to say that if a spouse can get covered that the company can deny them onto their plan”
But they didn’t do that much before and now they are doing it to offset some of the additional costs related to “The Affordable Care Act”. Washington is wreaking with hypocrisy.
Ex-Gop,
While it may be true in some cases the medical profession needs straightening out, my husband informed me in his line of work it would make the quality of care patients received go DOWN, which is a BAD negative effect for anyone receiving that kind of care. We should expect good quality of care wherever we go, and if Obamacare is causing it to go down, that’s a serious problem.
I don’t believe people who have severe medical issues should be kicked off a plan or not receive proper care, but based on what I’m seeing, Obamacare is NOT going to solve this, not really, and not in the long run.
I could go into other things I’ve heard from people having bad outcomes from it, but it just ticks me off to think about it, so rather than rile myself up further, I’ll just say the negative effects I’m seeing COULD be avoided by not implementing Obamacare and exploring other options. Based on what I’ve witnessed, other options haven’t been properly explored, and that Obama decided on this and Congress went along with it for whatever reason.
And, you conveniently ignored my other comment which was, if it’s so wonderful and going to be SO helpful, WHY are Congresspersons and other government officials opting out of it?
“Your lie comes in when you use your liberal mind-bending to say that dropping the mandate for employers having to offer their employees health insurance has no relationship to the mandate that individuals carry health insurance. It is two different decisions but to keep denying that one does not impact the other is ‘mind-bending’ to the point of being a lie. Own it.
“Own what? That is terrible, terrible reasoning. You essentially are saying they are related because, well, you think so.”
Ex-RINO, You say forcing a person to have health insurance is not at all related to mandating employer provide insurance to people. And then you rail against our insurance system cause it has always been based on it being available through employment. And the who;e while you deny that the two are not related. You can deny it; but you know it makes you look like a fool each time you do. Own it.
Ex and Jack: Simply put, when our leaders are hypocrites and do not lead by example, the masses do not follow. Actions speak louder than words. You can make excuses for O and his minions but the hard truth is that O pushes this country into an abyss of socialism where government holds unlimited power and control. I do not have to site sources or policies for neither one of you as it is self-evident. If you can’t see that, you are in for a rude awakening. Good luck recovering later. Over and out…
truth
First off, you can’t answer a question, which is ironic because I’ve answered every question since you made the false accusation that I dodge your questions…and now you can’t answer a simple question.
ON your first post of last night – where have I claimed it will always drive down prices? For some (see NYC) – yes. For others, that were on bare bones plans (like in NJ), it will go up.
For me personally, prices have been steady. For years before, they had gone up. Many people will get many results.
I’m just saying your logic on the NJ folks in general is faulty – most to all will still have insurance, just different plans.
truth
On your second post to me – first off, you’ve supported plans that ACTIVELY work to push people off of employer plans – so it seems to reek of hypocracy to be having a fit about this.
And again, what’s the huge downfall. Mom and Dad might go to different clinics.
I mean, come on – that’s what you are having a fit about?
Mother in Texas -
I can’t speak to the quality without knowing which part of health care he’s in. I will say that there a lot of bill provisions that will drive quality,and already are – for instance, dinging facilities on medicare patients if their error rate on certain procedures is too high. I’m also involved in health care, and there’s already a good shift to cheaper follow-up care compared to expensive readmissions.
In the long run, health care reform WILL solve the problem of people getting kicked off of plans because it has made it illegal.
I’m just saying, just off the right wing sights for a while and truly do some reading on it.
On your last question that you bolded, see my post to Thomas R. What, specifically, do you see them opting out of? If everybody is impacted by reform, are you saying people are moving to Finland to ignore it? Staffers are wrongfully being pushed towards the exchanges (which is odd, and also opens up the door to allowing public funds to be used for abortion – great work GOP) – but even those on employer plans are part of health care reform – so I’m not really sure what you even mean.
truth – on your third post to me – no, they aren’t related.
If your employer offers health care, you are in an employee pool. The employer mandate says they have to provide a certain level of care.
If you work at a small business, or are self employed, and you buy your insurance in the open market, the individual mandate to have insurance affects you.
Two completely different pools and unrelated mandates. And to call me a liar when I posted an article backing up my claim – I think that would require an apology (if you were a bigger man).
Thomas R -
Yes – I’d go over and out if I were you – it’s clear you don’t understand, based on your question (which is a trend I’m seeing on this board).
Furthermore, if you think that Obama is driving us to Socialism, then you must be 100% ignorant on what Socialism really is, or 100% delusional in regards to actual policy changes in this country. You’ve taken a tired argument that seemed to die about 3 years ago and use it in a post in which you didn’t even clarify your last statement, which was uninformed and wrong.
So yes, please over and out. I’m not trying to be mean here – but this drive by shooting type of posting is tiresome. Either read up on some stuff and make an informed argument, or move out of the way.
Thanks
EX-GOP,
When asked whether or not they would enter into Obamacare or stick with what they already have, some government people have said they will opt-out. If Obamacare is so awesome, why don’t they go ahead and have their names at the top of the list to be included in it? We’re being forced to endure it, why not the whole government?
What branch of the healthcare system my husband isn’t really the point (Quality is important.I don’t want to be told because of some policy in Obamacare there’s even less than can do for me, no, I want to have quality). The REAL point is, if they’re trying to get it right the FIRST time WITHOUT readmitting or having further problems down the line and because of Obamacare won’t be able to offer that level of quality to their patients, that is a PROBLEM. My husband is a very conscientious healthcare employee. He’s very careful with his patients, and tries to give them the absolute best care he can offer them for whatever their particular issue is. I think it’s wrong for people who want to do the best possible work for their patients to find out that they’re going to be even more limited on what they can do than they were before. My husband’s in the business to make people better, not sacrifice quality for some government policy that doesn’t do any good for his patients.
And why should we have to pay higher premiums to get the same coverage we’ve had? Nobody I know is extremely monetarily rich by any stretch of the imagination, yet their premiums are going up for things they don’t even want or need (I shouldn’t have to pay for someone else’s contraception or abortions! I have nothing to do with either one). Why should I pay for someone else’s healthcare when we’re working hard just to afford our own? I get having programs for those who truly need it, but there’s got to be some other way. I can’t believe this is the ONLY (or BEST) way available to the American people.
I could go on and on about what I’m seeing and hearing could happen or is happening with Obamacare that is a BAD affect on people, but you obviously aren’t interested. You keep giving me the same answers “Oh it’s going to work out just fine” and it already ISN’T. Say what you will, but you won’t change my mind.
Mother in Texas –
Your first paragraph – the health care of people in congress is much likes anyone else – for instance, I get insurance through my work. Congress gets their insurance through a plan called the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. That plan IS governed by the laws of health care reform – it has to meet certain standards. Now, maybe what you’re suggesting is that people opt out of their care and buy it through a health care exchange – but those are governed by similar laws – so I don’t know what sort of point that would be proving.
Second paragraph – You’ll need a specific example of how care is compromised under health care reform. If anything, we’re moving the other way because more care will be paid for (as opposed to now, where a lot of care is uncompensated care). I just can’t comment on hypotheticals.
Third paragraph – we’ve had health care increases above inflation for years – this shouldn’t be news. If you look it up, we’ve had average yearly increases of 5-10% for many, many years – pre reform, and post the plan passing. Health care reform says that certain standards must exist in a plan. In some states, they already had these standards, and health care is going to go DOWN for people on the individual market (you probably have seen in areas like NYC, some plans are half as much as they were). In some states, you could get bare bones plans, and those costs will go up.
Continuing on your third paragraph – for years you’ve been paying for people’s health care. The individual mandate was a CONSERVATIVE idea from the Heritage Foundation to do exactly what you are saying – to make people pay for their own care. The idea is that anybody is a liability (or could have a health care crisis at any time), so all should participate by having insurance. The system before reform said that if you don’t have insurance, wait until you’re super sick, come in, and we’ll give emergency care that gets passed onto all other consumers (look up EMTALA – there is no funding mechanism).
I’ll say this straight out – if you truly believe your statement “why should I pay for someone else’s healthcare when we’re working hard just to afford our own” – then you should LOVE reform, because the whole point is to get more people insured so that there aren’t as many freeloaders in the system.
Last paragraph – I’m completely interested – I just am going to counter arguments with facts, and I can’t counter ambiguous statements like “quality is going to go down”. This law is far from perfect – I call it the last ditch effort to make health care work in the free market. I haven’t ONCE said “oh, it’s going to work out just fine”. But I have countered some very bad information that people have posted with actual facts. For instance, truth posted some blatant false statements – and I clarified with those. That screams interested. If there is a single question you feel I’ve brushed off without facts and good info, let me know.
Mother in Texas –
One other thing – congressional staffers are required to buy through the exchanges instead of getting their plan from employers (which is the government in this case).
The GOP built this into the law.
The congressional plan didn’t allow for plans with abortion – but now congressional staffers, with federal funding, can buy a plan with abortion because they’ve been forced into the open market.
Nice job congress.
”And again, what’s the huge downfall. Mom and Dad might go to different clinics. I mean, come on – that’s what you are having a fit about?”
That is big of you to admit how little it matters to you that spouses are being forced onto different plans. How about the fact that mom and dad used to have one family deductible and now because mom is forced onto a separate policy the family now has twice as many deductibles to meet each year and their out-of-pocket medical costs go up an additional 5k a year….cry you a river huh? You are so into Obamacare that you have lost all ability to have no empathy for others. You are the perfect little DemocRATic soldier.
truth – you still haven’t answered my question, which has been asked multiple time.
The only way the family’s deductible doubles is if they somehow clone their family. Let’s say there was a family of four – one parent would have their kids (and probably a family deductible, and the other would have their single deductible (which they would have had anyway).
Again though, I’d check your priorities – you are saying:
– I, truthseeker, would like pre-existing condition discrimination to come back
– I, truthseeker, would like families to hit out of pocket maximums
– I, truthseeker, would like insurance companies to be able to kick somebody off of a plan
– I, truthseeker, would like people to skip care for small stuff, and wait until it’s an emergency to come in and seek care. We hope you live, but if not, well…
So sorry that I’m not buying your argument on the empathy thing. You’re essentially pushing somebody in front of a moving car to get hit, and then complaining that you got slightly clipped by the side view mirror.
Answer my question truth - I’d like to ask you a fundamental question about health care and what you believe. Do you believe that in America, we should support a system in which health care is provided by employers?”
And you to continue to say that an employer not being forced to provide me health insurance has no impact on my health insurance choices at all. Keep it up Ex-RINO. I must say I am basking in your continual outspoken lunacy.
This is getting almost as mind-bending as your continued insistence that we can give everybody extra benefits like no lifetime caps and no exclusions for pre-existing conditions etc. etc. and we can subsidize millions of people getting these policys with our premiums AND the price of health insurance policy’s will go down an average of $2500 per person. Can you repeat that one again for me too? I need the laugh.
I didn’t say that about the employer – I’m saying that if you believe that the individual mandate is related to the employer mandate, than you don’t understand.
Call it buyers remorse or the kinder gentler genders version of the boy toys all get better looking at closing time, morning after, coyote ugly, remorse:
.
Marianne Williamson, Huffington Post, January 2, 2010
Where Does A democRAT go from here?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marianne-williamson/where-does-a-democrat-go_b_408557.html
“The whole Obama phenomenon brings up memories from my distant past: the good-looking guy who talks real good, whose line you don’t buy immediately but whose charm is so dazzling that he gradually convinces you that this time it will be different.”
“I see so many people now — many of them men, interestingly enough — tangled up in an almost school-girlish, co-dependent, apologetic relationship with [b o]. As though “poor baby” should be tacked onto the end of every description of his failures….”
“I remember Bobby and I remember Martin. I remember when there was a moral force at the center of the Democratic Party. I see it sometimes still, in … an Anthony Weiner.”
Ex opines:
Truth doesn’t even know what he supports in health care. I doubt you do either.
Actually, ex, you are the one who has swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. I recall you saying on a number of occasions how wrong I was on IPAB being essentially a rationing board. When your hero Dr. Dean, the number one liberal of all liberals, came out and admitted IPAB was a rationing board you could not deal with it. You cannot admit even the most obvious failings of Obamacare, nor can you take it upon yourself to see how Obama has consistently given false hope and lies from the very beginning. Continue to read this if you can as you are being very badly misled.
Listen carefully my friend. If you do as follows you may actually learn something useful since you will not admit learning it here. I am going to connect you to a radio program where you can rather painlessly begin to learn the truth of things. It is just one hour a day, and two or three times a week they will have guests and perspectives on the issues that you probably will never hear from the spin doctors on National Progressive Radio, or for that matter on Wisconsin Progressive Radio either.
If you are in or near Lacrosse tune in 1570 AM, and maybe you can pull in 93.9 FM too. Program starts at shortly after 5:00 PM and goes an hour. Happy listening!
Ken:
Great link. Thanks! Required reading for ex, don’t you think?
“Let’s say there was a family of four – one parent would have their kids (and probably a family deductible, and the other would have their single deductible (which they would have had anyway).”
But the family deductible would have capped out long before the sum of four individual deductibles. But being the health care legend you deem yourself to be; you should have already known that.
Jerry – glad you want to talk IPAB again – you sort of bailed mid debate last time – I have the link to that thread if you would like it. Both Jack and I pointed out that you, in fact, support rationing as well (unless you want to put in Universal coverage), which you don’t – you just ration care based on riches – so the rich get their care, and the poor don’t.
You’re going to have to find a link where I say it isn’t rationing – it isn’t in that thread.
But it isn’t rationing in the way you think it is rationing. It seems to me that you believe the board handles individual cases. It doesn’t – it just sets best practices in case spending gets too high – and congress can overrule those with cuts of their own if they’d like.
But let’s get back to this fundamental question, because I think it is HUGE to answer.
Let’s say that a friend of yours at work (and on the same health plan) has something terribly wrong with them. There are two treatment options with the same outcomes (statistically). One treatment option costs $400. The other costs $1500. Is it rationing to tell the person that the plan won’t cover the $1500 – that the $400 is their only option? Is that rationing?
On the rest of your post – I can’t really comment on things I don’t believe I’ve said. I’ll make it clear though my views on rationing.
The American health care system has rationed for years – to believe it doesn’t is foolish. The system has rationed health care based on money, power, and pre-existing conditions (or a person’s general health). Any sort of health care will have to ration care to a degree – it simply isn’t feasible to say that anybody can walk into a medical facility and demand any sort of treatment whenever they want.
You want to ration by dollars – those who can afford get the care they want – those that don’t, go without.
I want to ration based on stats. If costs outweigh inflation, I want experts to suggest treatments that don’t make sense given other options available. I want plans to say “no, there are other options that are economically more feasible”.
So you’re against that basic concept?
truth -
’d like to ask you a fundamental question about health care and what you believe. Do you believe that in America, we should support a system in which health care is provided by employers?”
I’ll answer your question but first I need to figure out what you are trying to parse here. Are you admitting that waiving the employer mandate to provide health care effects a persons health insurance choices but denying that removing such an employer mandate has no effect on an individual’s ability to purchase health insurance?
Ex-RINO, I think I’ll coin the phrase ‘Obamacare truther’ after you.
Obamacare truther - a person who insists that Obamacare can give everybody extra benefits like no lifetime caps and no exclusions for pre-existing conditions etc. etc. and subsidize the cost for millions of people getting these policys AND the result will be that the premiums of health insurance policy’s will go down an average of $2500 per person.
You couldn’t make this stuff up.
“Do you believe that in America, we should support a system in which health care is provided by employers?”
Ex-RINO,
I don’t go to my employer for health care; I go see the doctor. But I see no reason why we should discourage employers from providing health insurance to their employees.
EX-GOP,
On the contrary, I’m not at all interested in this method of health care reform. The execution and methods don’t look right. And there’s a large portion of things involved that I really don’t care for.
truth – I’m not trying to parse anything here – the reason of my question is because in the past, you’ve supported plans whose goal it is to get people off of employer plans and into the individual market (the theory goes that with more people in the free market, you’ll have more competition). So I’ve found it less than logical for you to yell about people losing employer coverage when you’ve supported mass efforts to get people off of employer coverage.
So are you more of a proponent of Hillary Clinton’s health care plan that was more of a mandate for all employers to provide health care?
truth -
I don’t believe people’s premiums will go down like that – for one, I don’t think the individual mandate is strong enough. For two, we still have too much power to special interests. I think that long term, costs will be controlled more than they were, and some people will see decreases (and some at that amount, or greater) – but some people had really crappy plans, and measuring by premium dollars wouldn’t be the way to go (I’d measure by out of pocket dollars).
Mother in Texas -
That’s fine – just know that the status quo system (before reform) that you seem to support had more freeloaders, by definition, than we’ll have after reform – so when you complain about paying for others care – that reality exists at a higher percentage in the system that you support. Which is odd – but I’m just going off of what you say.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/opinion/sunday/why-obamacare-is-a-conservatives-dream.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
“The rationalization and extension of the current market is financed by the other linchpin of the law: the mandate that we all carry health insurance, an idea forged not by liberal social engineers at the Brookings Institution but by conservative economists at the Heritage Foundation. The individual mandate recognizes that millions of Americans who could buy health insurance choose not to, because it requires trading away today’s wants for tomorrow’s needs. The mandate is about personal responsibility — a hallmark of conservative thought.”
That’s what I find so interesting – that conservatives I talk to hate all the conservative aspects of the law. It is why I press to ask people what they really believe. I mean, the individual mandate and health care exchanges were ideas from conservatives.
And as I’ve pressed people, I find more people on this board are actually advocating LIBERAL ideas. Heck – I honestly believe truth’s beliefs are closest to Hillary’s health care plans years ago. I’ve had other people practically singing the praises of Universal care…they just don’t know it. It’s funny, in a way. The bottom line though is that if Obama suddenly said “let’s ban abortion”, I think half of the world of conservatives would hate the idea just because it came from him.
Ex-RINO is the stereotypical jilted wife who even after witnessing her husband in the very act of coitus flagrante delicto insists that her own eyes have lied to her.
Ex is so enfatuated in his school boy bromance with b o that he is unable and unwilling to acknowledge the obvious.
Ex clings tenaciously to the lie because to even begin to entertain the thought of considering the remote possibility of the truth is too painful for him to bear.
Ex chooses ignorance because he dare not jeopardize his bliss.
It must be a horrible existence to worship a goddess who is so impotent that she requires her devotees to conceal her weakness with increasingly obvious lies.
her mouth is an open grave containing the bones of her naive and gullible victims.
Ken -
And you’re like Keith Olberman back when he had his progressive show – a lot of yelling, and nobody seems to be listening.
If you want to actually ever post anything of relevance and engage in a conversation, I’m willing.
99% of your posts are those odd format, sexually or racially laced statements just to hear yourself speak. If I were able to hide comments from people, yours would be the first I’d hide – not because you are mean or anything – just because you aren’t relevant to anything ever being talked about.
Have a good day.
Ex,
I suggest you contact Mark Sandford’s ex wife.
She might be able to put you on the path to recovery.
Or you can continue to follow in Hillary’s footsteps.
A few more years and we’ll probably all be following in Hillary’s footsteps, unless another credible political party emerges.
Ex,
The goddess might be able to put you in touch with Elizabeth Edwards.
If Hillary can conjure up and consult with the dead, then I don’t see any reason why it won’t work for a fellow democRAT.
Unless the goddess IS a respecter of persons and DOES discriminate on the basis of gender.
Ex,
Are you wearing your WWgD bracelet?
What Would gaia Do
“A few more years and we’ll probably all be following in Hillary’s footsteps, unless another credible political party emerges.”
I may be bound hand and forciably dragged, but I will not be willingly following a woman who calculatingly subordinates her own daughters emotional well being to her own selfish and single minded grasping for political power.
Your premise is flawed in that it falsely implies that the democRAT party is ‘ credible’, but silly me, I rely on words having meaning and you being a democRAT, are in no ways hindered by truth.
I do think Christie stands a chance, and I’d be okay with him – he’s more of an independent than anything else. I don’t see anybody else in the GOP worth considering at this point. Maybe they could clone Reagan…but he’d be knocked off in a primary by some crazy tea party person.
“Truth – I don’t believe people’s premiums will go down like that”
What? Is this a brief moment of clarity for Ex-RINO. He is disagreeing with one of his fearless leaders promises. I know this is asking a lot of you but does this mean you are now willing to even admit that ‘The Affordable Care Act’ is raising he cost of health care premiums?
”(I’d measure by out of pocket dollars).”
Ex-RINO, I see you had only a brief moment of sanity when you admitted that Obamacare is raising the cost of everybody’s health care premiums. But then you quickly slipped back into Obama Truther mode. The same factors that are causing premiums to rise are also the ones causing employers to offer policies with increased family deductibles and increased individual deductibles in order for to keep premiums from going through the roof. So annual out-of-pocket costs are skyrocketing too. The UPS spouse example I gave above is just one more example of how that is occurring.
truth -
What I’m saying is that I don’t agree with putting a dollar value decrease or increase on premiums, because out of pocket expenses matter a lot as well. As we’ve seen with the mini-med plans that you support, you can have low premiums, but such terrible coverage that the out of pocket is much higher – so your really have to look at total out of pocket.
And when anybody but an Obamacare Truther looks at total out-of-pocket they see people incurring thousands of dollars more in out-of-pocket health insurance costs due to the ‘Affordable Care Act’.
Interesting claim since most of the act hasn’t even started.
Again, if you based more of your rhetoric on fact, it would help.
In my life, the fastest out of pocket and premium increases I’ve had were back in the mid 2000’s, pre reform, under Bush, in the status quo system that you seem to support. How was the free market helping things then? Seems like it was a massive failure for me and my family. Last two years, I’ve seen no premium increase, and no deductible increase.
Tell me about it. And the train wreck is just getting started. My family deductible went up this past year from 3k to 5k and the individual deductible went up from 1k to 2k. Nearly doubled my out-of-pocket deductible cost. That is not rhetoric. It is the truth that everybody (except the Obamacare truthers) admits is happening around them. How else do you think employers and insurance companies can offset the costs associated with your health care nirvana?
Again truth, costs have been going up for YEARS. To pretend like they are just starting now is foolish.
Aren’t you on an employer plan though? Did you have terrible coverage pre-reform?
Before Obamacare I had a lifetime cap etc. etc. I still have the same insurer and same doctors etc. When you and the minions of Obamacare truthers pretend that those extra mandated benefits are not the primary driver of the cost of insurance it makes you something less than honest.
truth – again, are you on an employer plan, or out on the individual market?
Did you say that you had no increase on your premium or deductibles last year? Who is your insurer.
I have Blue Cross. But I would like to find out more about your insurer. Who is it?
truth – two plans, but if you dont live in Western Wisconsin, my guess is you are out of luck (but not sure) – Gunderson’s health care plan, and the Mayo Clinic (used to be Franciscan Skemp).
But this is why I keep asking if you get insurance through your employer – a group plan through an employer isn’t something anybody can just take advantage of, and one plan through a place like Gunderson might see an increase while another doesn’t based on the employee pool. If you had terrible insurance, or have a lot of older people or people with medical issues, your plan will have bigger increases. That’s why raising the age of medicare eligibility (as some politicians want to) would be a terrible idea.
I was on Blue Cross in Minnesota, and bought it through the individual market, and over about 5 years, our premiums almost doubled (and we raised our deductible a ton so that our premiums didn’t go up even more).
Dairy farmers feed and medicate their herd to optimize milk production.
Once a cow ceases to be profitable, the farmer kills the cow and sells the carcase to squeeze the last bit of revenue out of the bovine.
democRATs view taxpayers the same way. As b o puts it, ‘when we have reached the end of our productive years [ceased being a source of revenue to the state and become a useless eater], then it is time for the ‘two cent’ solution, a .22 caliber bullet between the eyes.
A democRAT governor says we have a duty to die.
b o will then bill the surviving family for a brick of bullets, a case of firearms, a firing squad, multiple deluxe caskets, a fleet of hearses, two brand new cemeteries, and a funeral extravaganza including a .22 gun salute.
The I.R.S will collect the ‘memoriam fee’.
b o and his humanist devotees love death and they believe the panet is over populated by several billion human weeds and they are constantly seeking to profit personally from the solution.
You said that you have two plans Gunderson and the Mayo Clinic? Why two?
We have two major healthcare players on this side of the state – those two. Because both are popular, our HR team negotiates rates, gets them to match plans, and then employees can choose either of the two options – so they are identical plans, identical rates, but give access to the two systems (depending on employee preference).
OK. I thought you meant that you have two yourself and that would have been odd. It is just a fact that the same pool of people are now having to pay more for an insurance policy due to the Obamacare mandated benefit changes (no lifetime caps etc..). So I am asking myself how is it possible that you are not paying any more? The only explanation I can see is that your employer is absorbing ALL of the additional costs for you. That also explaining why you are so cavalier about the Obamacare driven rate increases Most employers can’t afford to do that and in fact it is causing many employers to drop coverage all together because the additional costs would make them unprofitable as a business. That is what the McDonald’s CEO was explaining in the article I posted earlier.
truth – A few things help us out:
1) Our workforce average age is under 40 and is generally healthy
2) We have a cutting edge wellness program (which, I believe, we now get better tax breaks for)
3) We have a primary care clinic, so most of our care gets taken care of off our plan
Also, we’ve had good healthcare as well, so complying with minimum standards wasn’t a big issue – which is why I wondered if your insurance was awful before hand.
I’m not cavalier about the increases – but we’ve ALWAYS had big increases, and while many people are seeing increases, many others are seeing decreases. You can’t only focus on one without the other.
Fundamentally, we also need to change the way healthcare works in this country – and that needs to happen and be observed over a few decades, not a few months or even years. We need to get away from treating people with out of control diabetes and towards finding it early and managing it. That doesn’t happen over night…but getting people preventative care can help that happen in the long run.
One other thing truth – premiums don’t tell the whole story. If a person pays $100 a month, but has $5000 in out of pocket costs – doubling the premium could be a winning situation if the out of pocket costs go way down – so just saying somebody had an increase or decrease doesn’t tell enough of the story.
“While many people are seeing increases, many others are seeing decreases.”
Ex-RINO, only in the mind an Obamacare truther are many others seeing decreases. That is why nobody takes you seriously. List some of the many people you know who are seeing decreases?
New York rates – health care reform – individual market:
http://money.cnn.com/2013/07/17/news/economy/obamacare-health-insurance-new-york/index.html
Info on Maryland and Connecticut
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/07/27/2365901/growing-number-of-states-are-reporting-lower-than-expected-health-care-premiums/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/07/28/rates-differ-state-by-state/2590723/
Of most importance…
In the 11 states HHS analyzed, the report said “that greater competition and greater transparency are driving down prices in the marketplace.” The agency studied rates in California, Colorado, the District of Columbia, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Washington. In six states, those costs are also 18% lower than small employers had paid in the past for similar plans. Some states may see individual rates go down as much as 50%.
The actual rates are lower than HHS, the Government Accountability Office and insurance companies expected them to be. The Society of Actuaries estimated that underlying claims costs could go up by an average of 32% by 2017.
For Americans who receive health insurance through their employees, HHS statistics show those rates are stabilizing. Those rates increased by 3% from 2011 to 2012, the lowest increase since 1996.
Ex-RINO, you are not believable and any numbers that HHS puts out would twist the words to appear to be something they are not. I live in the real world. The one where you cannot subsidize the health insurance costs of millions of people and remove any exclusions for pre-existing conditions and remove all lifetime caps and keep your kids on your plan till 26 and ‘magically’ the cost of peoples policies still go down. Are you also selling a piece of a bridge somewhere?
How is Obamacare accomplishing this? Is it the efficiency of Acorn reps working as promoters that drives the Exchange costs down? Is it the hard work and dedication of the IRS that will collect funds from the people whose rates do not go down? Is it a magic dust that they sprinkle? How does this happen?
truth -
Your first statement is pretty much garbage, so I’ll mostly skip it. Just because you don’t understand how it works is really trivial to the conversation. I posted multiple links – data is out there – you owe it to be at least a bit informed about this if you’re going to talk about it. Otherwise, you sound lazy.
Your second post – how it accomplished is broadening the base. An insurance pool operates at a certain percentage (total premiums to care). If you get more young, healthy people into the pool, it helps defray the costs.
Let me make it super basic. Imagine you and one other person are in an insurance plan. Just you two. The one person has $10K in hard costs in a year – and you have $2K. The whole plan has $12K, so to stay afloat (and insurance companies must stay afloat), a premium would cost at least $6K. Now, you add one more person that has $2K in costs. Now you have $14K divided by three people, which is less than the $6K.
So the theory goes – drive people into plans and spread out costs.
Before reform, we had the REVERSE happening – less people were covered, so the costs continued to rise, causing people who couldn’t cost justify it to drop out, making the pool even less, and driving up costs.
This is also the problem with the ‘high risk pools’ you might have read about. If everyone on a plan has cancer, it can’t be spread out (in regards to cost).
Furthermore, there are other cost control measures that I could go into – but that is the basic, entire theory of health care and costs (in a nutshell).
Ex-RINO, are you a salesman? So your theory is that we can force enough college kids to pay enough for their health insurance that they will be able to effectively reduce everybody’s health insurance costs. Did you ever hear the saying “if it sounds too good to be true then it probably isn’t true.” I live in the real world. And in the real world college kids don’t have enough money to buy their own insurance, let alone subsidize everybody else’s health insurance. You are a lark.
truth -
Not a salesman, but I understand healthcare. Do you want me to post articles from conservatives with the individual mandate reasoning and how it relates to health care? Again, the idea came from conservatives in response to Hillary’s universal plan. Again, the irony of this all is 15 years ago, health care reform was a conservative plan – not every aspect, but the fundamental pillars.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2011/10/20/how-a-conservative-think-tank-invented-the-individual-mandate/
The math I laid out though is pretty simple – I don’t know why you are confused by it. Any article on health care reform explaining it talks about that concept. If you get millions more paying customers into the system, it spreads costs out.
I’m a little disturbed that this is news to you.
So your theory is that we can force enough college kids to pay enough for their health insurance that they will be able to effectively reduce everybody’s health insurance costs.
Sorry truth – I’ve got to come back to this…is this seriously news to you? Do you not notice that car insurance companies would rather have safe drivers? Have you never connected those dots? And that life insurance costs less money when you’re young, because you are less likely to die.
Do you seriously not even understand the basic concept of insurance? Of course the theory goes that if you get enough young people buying, it helps spread the cost out. College kids is a bad example (that you used) because the majority have always been insured – but the mid 20-somethings typically haven’t been able to afford insurance – so you subsidize it, get people covered, have them pay in, and it spreads the cost.
Wow…back to square one. Do we need to clarify other things, like what a human is, and what a business is?
Ex-RINO, I understand theory and I understand reality. You understand theories that suit your point and have a propensity to live outside of reality.
In the above paragraph you said that we should subsidize the health insurance of 20 somethings in order to spread the costs. Tell me who is paying to subsidize these costs?
truth – That is how insurance works! It isn’t some theory – it’s the reality of insurance! Seriously, do you not understand this? This IS REALITY. If you have MORE people participate in an insurance pool that take out less than they put in, then it spreads the costs.
This is why you can’t eliminate pre-existing conditions with an individual mandate – else, people would just wait until they are really sick to buy care.
Seriously – this isn’t theory – this is how insurance works. This is reality man. Wow.
Ex-RINO, In the above paragraph you said that we should subsidize the health insurance of 20 somethings in order to spread the costs. Tell me who is paying to subsidize these costs?
Theory is an explanation of what effects the costs of health insurance. Reality is the cost of health insurance.
Various tax increases allow for the subsidization.
Reality is the cost of health insurance…and health insurance is driven by the mechanics of how insurance works – which I explained above.
I know you don’t like aspects of the law – but I think it’s 100% clear you don’t have a good grasp of the law, and in reality, it seems like you aren’t even sure what you support when it comes to health care. Might be good looking at some others plans out there…you might be surprised what other people have proposed (that you seem to not like – so I’m not sure what you’d support – maybe you just support the right to complain).
Ex-GOP to Thomas R: ” Furthermore, if you think that Obama is driving us to Socialism, then you must be 100% ignorant on what Socialism really is.”
You have no idea Ex. You are conversing with someone who was born and raised in the Eastern Block. Are you aware of what the Eastern Block was? That is exactly the reason I never became a democrat. See – the problem for you is that I have comparison and you, well you have your “savior” O. Again, good luck recovering later… Don’t jump to calling someone ignorant before this pro-socialistic O’s experiment plays itself out fully…
“Various tax increases allow for the subsidization.”
Ex-RINO, so your idea is that if we have the government tax us and we grwo a huge bureaucracy to collect and distribute the tax monies and then we take what is left over to lower the cost of health insurance. That is so stupid all I can do is lol and let you continue to speak.
Wasn’t the Eastern Bloc communist? Not socialist? There are socialist countries in the world today that are nothing like the USSR, China, or Cuba.
Obama’s barely left-of-center if you look at his politics at a global level.
Thomas R – then those early years must have really screwed up your brain – because the rhetoric and policies don’t match – and those who claim Obama is a socialist simply are lazy about argument and ignorant about economic policy.
truth –
No, my idea is that we expand Medicare for all so that we have universal coverage.
In the last ditch effort to make health care work in the free market, the key things that MUST be done is to get more people into insurance pools. To do that, you need some sort of mandate, and you need to make it more feasible cost wise.
Look, you can belly ache and laugh and whatever all you want – first off all, you don’t understand the system. Second of all, you support a system in which those of us that are insured will continue to pay for those who skip the whole insurance thing. You may laugh because you don’t understand what insurance is, and how the market forces work – but lay out what you really believe sometime, and what you’ve been supporting, and then you really might split a gut.
I’m telling you truth though – from the little bit that you’ve actually said you support, I think you should order your Hillary 2016 stickers right now.
No Jack, its obvious the 80’s propaganda in the US must have done a number on you. The eastern block was not communist but socialist. USSRs brand of communism died with Stalin and the only three countries that continue to function so are China, Cuba and South Korea.
Ex-GOP: my brain is very healthy thanks. Did I ever claim that he is a socialist? O does promote pro-socialistic policies that will ultimately eat us out of house and home. BTW, those early years we had better public schools than legions of dems and libs have offered this nation in decades. You have joined a party that can’t even ensure adequate academics thus no wonder O is pushing to import from other nations for his “innovation” project. And you are a true dem resolving to insults when all else is exausted.
Dear Ex: Hillary is nothing but an opportunist who made a deal with the big O and now retreated after her infamous fiasco hoping people will forget. She has not contributed one iota to the national debate on anything, all talk and no action. I truly hope that people will not be duped come 2016.
Oh, and Hillary’s book “It Takes a Village” is garbage too. It takes two loving and fully committed parents to raise a child. Not this liberal madness all around us. What crock… A better title for her vision would have been “It Takes Connections.” Just look at her daughter. Case closed.
Sorry Thomas, the website isn’t letting me “quote” you so I’ll try to respond without quotes.
I was born in 1988, so I wasn’t around for the major propaganda against the USSR and Eastern Bloc and all that. I actually don’t know much about it, everything I have read says that the countries policies were considered communist though. I do realize there is the issue with getting English language resources that aren’t heavily biased, considering the US’s problems with that area for a long time. If you have some non-biased sources saying otherwise I would like to read them (I can only read English or Spanish though, if it’s another language I’ll have to Google translate it lol).
South Korea isn’t a communist nation so I’m not sure what you’re talking about? They are a constitutional democracy I believe. North Korea was communist, but they seem to be quite a totalitarian dictatorship/total hereditary dictatorship now.
I meant North but before they abondoned communist ideology. Hat’s off Sir.
“I know you don’t like aspects of the law – but I think it’s 100% clear you don’t have a good grasp of the law,”
rotflmao…over 20,000 pages of regulations…you are a hoot.
Thomas R -
“When all else is exhausted”…??????
Let me remind you, good sir, that you came into this thread like a drive by shooting. You said a bunch of pretty illogical stuff – got called on it, and disappeared. Again, if you’d like to join the debate and actually back up what you say with some sort of substance, I’m all for it. But don’t come on here, say a couple of confusing pieces of rhetoric you read on the Drudge report somewhere, disappear when called for a clarification, and then have the nerve to say others resort to insults when “all else is exhausted”.
Come on man – some substance please.
You and truth are killing me here – you’ve got to do a little research on the topic – bring a little game to the table – I’m not even enjoying this anymore.
I mean, truth doesn’t even know how insurance works…
I know how insurance works. I have been paying for it for several decades and have had my family through all kinds of deductibles and have worked through everything from annual checkups to catastrophic care. I have taken advantage of advantage of FSA’s and wellness programs and just about everything there is to experience.
What is really funny is that the guy who is backing Obamacare is bringing up that I can’t understand health insurance because it is so complicated. You support a law that is only a couple years old and it has already added over 20,000 pages of regulations and that has made insurance so complex that 50% of the deadlines written in the law have been missed by the Obama administration. Not to mention that we are learning about new waivers that are popping up every day as the people like you who passed the law attempt to keep the law from imploding on itself. You really look like a fool in your arrogance. What I do understand about health insurance is that you and the government should keep your grimy fingers out of other peoples health care choices; including their choice of insurance.
Thomas R., Thanks for sharing your life’s experience when you witnessed socialism taking control of the Eastern Bloc country that you had immigrated from. What are some of the similarities between the things that you see the Obama administration implementing are what you saw happening while your country turned socialist?
truth
You were ‘shocked’ that within healthcare, the plan was to try to get more people to spread out the costs. You thought that Obama was just using magic dust. When I explained how insurance works, you called me a ‘salesman’.
Nope – that’s just how insurance works.
I don’t really give a rip how many pages it is – there are a ton of sites that at least explain the basic components of the plan. You owe it to others, before you go spouting off the lies you do, to educate yourself a bit. The things you’ve screwed up along the way show that you are bashing something you don’t understand. Lay off of the Fox Political Entertainment Channel for a while and spread your wings to some other sites – it would be good for you.
I just really, really wouldn’t play that “other people are ignorant line”. The basics you screw up truth – things like the difference between medicare and medicaid. What a mandate is, and the difference between them. How insurance works. Quite frankly, I’m a little startled that they let you vote. I don’t mean that in a mean way.
Thomas -
Yes – would love to see the answer to Truth’s question. Remember – he put “implementing”.
The problem is Ex that for you there will never be any acceptable substance but that is okay with me. I experienced socialism during my formative years and you have not. You think that O is the savior who will “change” this nation for the better and I do not based on the many pro-socialistic policies he is ramming down our throats. You want the government to take care of you and I do not.
I see hypocricy from the Oval Office and you do not.
This country started as a Republic but ended as a controlled-state where pseudo democracy rules the day.
“Yes – would love to see the answer to Truth’s question. Remember – he put “implementing”.”
Ex-RINO, Thomas shares some his life experience with you and you insult Thomas and tell him that he is illogical and that he must have hurt his brain as a younger person etc. etc. And then you expect have the balls to ask him share more of himself with you. You are arrogant son-of-a-progressive.
Thomas -
Sure – any substance is acceptable. You asked a question about Obama’s participation in the law – I asked you to clarify and called you out on the question. Where was the response? YOu disappeared.
Then you can and cried socialist policies.
Even truth threw out there – share some policies that are/have been implemented that are socialistic.
So come on boys, throw it on out there.
You have no couth Ex-RINO.
Is government subsidized health insurance a move towards socialism?
truth – I went to the Socialist Party of the US website, and you have a friend – they aslo are against Health care reform!
It’s not a move towards socialism because insurance companies are still a huge component, the system largely works within the confines of the free market, and too many people are uninsured.
Plus, we’ve had the government subsidizing health care for years – medicare, tricare, medicaid – and even employer based plans receive generous tax treatment (something conservatives generally want to get rid of to force people into the individual market).
Okay guys – throw out the the policies. Mostly Thomas – he made the claim in the first place – but either of you can try.
EX: Conservatives want people to be responsible. Socialism saw its demise in the Eastern Bloc because the government subsidized citizens in every aspect of their lives. Freebies for all and let the almighty government hold your hand was the motto. Pres O is a proponent of both. If you can’t see that, please visit an optometrist soon.
Truthseeker, thanks for your validation! The problem is that democrats in this country insult the opposition as it is all they know. Pretty soon Ex will start calling me racist since I just advocated for personal responsibiliy in my response to her above.
Is government subsidized health insurance a move towards socialism?
YES IT IS Truthseeker.
And Ex: if and when O-Care becomes law, the insurance companies you allege account for this policy not moving us toward socialism - will be totally regulated by the almighty brother out of Washington. And than it will be socialism in full force. Live and see…
Lovely – so Socialists themselves say that reform isn’t a socialist plan, but you guys say it is for reasons that we’ve been doing for years and years.
See what I can’t take you two seriously sometimes? The rhetoric doesn’t match the supporting evidence.
Fine – say I need to see an optometrist. Why? You haven’t shown a single implemented idea. What am I supposed to see more clearly???
And why would I call you a racist – you haven’t given enough actual policy ideas to deduce anything!
I mean, embrace logic guys. Do some research. Figure something out. Right now, you’re just throwing out dumb statements with no backing, and sound like a couple of paranoid old men.
Make a point, back it up. I see neither, which is disappointing.
Ex-RINO,
You are such a lark. Both you yourself and Obama have said that Obamacare should be seen as a stepping stone to force our country into eventual single payer….and that is as socialist as health care gets.
But let’s move on cause this is fun. What about Obama’s penchant to talk about the need to implement policies of economic justice/fairness through wealth re-distribution, is that socialist?
No I haven’t truth – I’ve said it is a better option, but I’ve said specifically this is the last ditch effort to see if we can make it work in the free market – not a stepping stone at all – gives more customers to insurance companies, not less.
On wealth re-distribution – that’s only socialist if Reagan was a socialist. Heck, just about everyone believes in a progressive tax system – does that make them a socialist?
Here is what you are putting on the record so far.
1) You admit that single payer is socialist and you say that you would like single payer if you had your choice in the matter but you do not see NObambacare as a stepping stone to single payer. That means you want socialized medicine. Why do you have so much trouble just coming out and admitting that you are a socialist? Are you ashamed?
Oh my goodness truth.
People can agree with a varying amount of socialist type of programs without being a socialist. You agree with Social Security, and that’s a socialist type of program. You also agree with Medicare, that’s a socialist program.
Some people are capitalists or libertarians who think that healthcare is one of the few things that should not be taken care of by the free market. Those people are not socialists.
Let’s compare you to Nobama.
1) I am not sure whether or not Nobama thinks single payer is socialist. Do you know? 2)Like you, NObama has admitted that he likes single as the final but unlike you he states that he sees NObamacare as a stepping stone to single payer. 3) You admire presidents who you see implementing wealth redistribution.
NObama frequently campaigns in support of Planned Parenthood and in return the abortion industry (ie. Planned Parenthood) sponsors campaign rallies for NObama. That relationship existed when NObama was a senator from Illinois and continues through the presidency. See link below for Obama at Planned Parenthood rally while he was a senator from Illinois. His campaign as senator was very much funded on the backs of dead babies (by the leading abortion provider in the US). Here is a video (23 minutes if you can stomach it) of a much younger NObama giving a senatorial campaign speech at a Planned Parenthood sponsored rally. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUl99id2SvM
The point here is that even though promoting abortion is an integral part of the DemocRATic party platform and it is not part of the Republican party platform; there are still people who call themselves Republican and yet support pro-abort politicians. Were you aware that Planned Parenthood spent over 12 million dollars on NObama’s 2012 re-election campaign. It is an alliance built on the blood of unborn children being torn apart. And you are a part of it. Own it.
Jack, I understand what you are saying, that people agree with varying degrees of socialism. I planned on covering more than just health care but I thought that would be a good place to start because the topic of this thread is related to NObamacare. I had gone on to the concept of income distribution next and planned on giving several other examples of socialism that were not related to health insurance. I just wanted to clarify what Ex-RINO had posted so far. NObamacare was just a start.
If you think Ex sounds like a socialist, you have to stretch the definition of socialism really, really far. He sounds typical Democrat to me (even right of the typical Dem, actually). And Democrats in this country aren’t remotely socialist.
I don’t know why this bugs me so much, but for some reason I really don’t like it when people label political viewpoints incorrectly. It’s just trying to label someone as something “bad” so you can insult them.
truth -
I’ll answer your question if you help me out with this first -
Do you support the current structure of the fire department and police, which is, that they are paid through the taxes of everyone, and not on a subscription basis. Or do you believe people should subscribe to police or fire services,and only get services if they have paid? Also, do you believe each town should have several fire departments and police companies, and you pick which one you want to be served by.
The question should pretty much give you a clue which way I’m going here…
Jack,
Your, ‘degrees of socialism’ could give a pass to anybody you wanted just by moving the line. Do you deny that Obama is a socialist too?
Of course Obama isn’t a socialist.