Quote: rxwineObama lied, health insurance premiums went up.
Nope, just doesn't rhyme.
So if doesn't rhyme, it doesn't matter?
The President's last campaign is over. Slick speeches and constant campaigning won't change the results of his term in office. Sure, he has some more time left to do good or bad things for the country (I'm betting on bad) that will be added to his legacy. Maybe he will campaign for his reputation after he leaves office, but I'd prefer he stay out of sight much like his predecessor.
He did lie.
Transparency?
He has embraced a "the buck stops anywhere but here" mentality.
He apparently knows very little about the big things going on in his administration.
Naturally, his supporters will counter with a huge list of accomplishments that aren't all they seem to be...
The beauty of it, my friend, is that it is no longer something you and I will discuss as often; his Presidency is slipping towards the past and will be judged not by how everyone wishes it was during his Presidency but by how it actually ended up. His main legacy will be being the first black President; what he should have been looking to be was the best President ever who also happened to be black.
As for judging Obama, like me, you're barely better than a partisan hack. Let's leave it to the historians.
Obamacare has hardly played out yet.
“I don’t think the message was wrong. I think the message was accurate. It was not precise enough…[it] should have been caveated with – ‘assuming you have a policy that in fact does do what the bill is designed to do.’”
Steny Hoyer, D-MD
House Democratic Whip
Sure, it is okay your party outright lied to gain support for a policy that changed how 1/6th of the US economy is handled...
Health care needed reform of some sort. The Dems had the power (control of the Congress and Presidency) and choose to rush through a bad law rather than craft a good done. It was okay to lie about it.
""We're not cutting people, we're actually transitioning people," Geraghty told NBC's David Gregory. "What we've been doing is informing folks that their plan doesn't meet the test of the essential health benefits, therefore they have a choice of many options that we make available through the exchange."
The Dems are taking this kind of statement from an insurance executive and using it to defend what is happening and to try and say they weren't really lies...
Quote: RonC
Sure, it is okay your party outright lied to gain support for a policy that changed how 1/6th of the US economy is handled...
Just as it was okay for Romney to dismiss 47% of the population while being secretly recorded.
Quote: rxwineRush? That crap went on for quite awhile. Remember all the town halls. If we waited any longer someone besides Ted Kennedy would have died., then no support at all to push it through. They made too many deals with the devil as it was.
If it took so long and they weren't rushing a poor piece of legislation through, why did they need to do it without the promised transparency? Why did Pelosi even need to say that the bill needed to be passed so we could learn what was in it?
C'mon. It is crap--we do agree on that point.
Quote: rxwineJust as it was okay for Romney to dismiss 47% of the population while being secretly recorded.
If you read here, I have attacked that statement and the continued use of it.
Your defense of Obama's lies is "well, they did it"...which is precisely why it won't change. The side we are on can lie and we defend it; the other side lies or misleads and they are the devil.
Truth is unimportant to many.
The citizens pay the price.
Quote: RonCIf you read here, I have attacked that statement and the continued use of it.
Your defense of Obama's lies is "well, they did it"...which is precisely why it won't change. The side we are on can lie and we defend it; the other side lies or misleads and they are the devil.
Truth is unimportant to many.
The citizens pay the price.
Hey Jesus said, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Maybe he was wrong.
Quote: RonC
If you read here, I have attacked that statement and the continued use of it.
Your defense of Obama's lies is "well, they did it"...which is precisely why it won't change. The side we are on can lie and we defend it; the other side lies or misleads and they are the devil.
Truth is unimportant to many.
The citizens pay the price.
Quote: rxwineHey Jesus said, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Maybe he was wrong.
Somehow I don't think that was meant to stop us from holding politicians accountable...the problem is that our tendency is focus on holding the other side accountable.
Quote: Face
Presidon't
Outstanding!
President Obamacan't, June 2012
Here's a good article..there is text although it says 'video' at the end of the URL:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Wire/2013/1029/Millions-losing-health-plans-under-Obamacare.-Did-president-mislead-video
Quote: AlanWell Obama did mislead...If you like what you have now you can keep it. But, here's the catch(that was not mentioned)..it has to meet some criteria otherwise it'll be cancelled because the coverage doesn't comply with whatever..what a crock!!!
Sorry, but I have to believe anyone who believed him when he said that is just plan street-stupid. Same as the people who believe Obamacare will somehow *reduce* deficits and that it will come in as-budgeted.
Sigh, those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it; those of us who do know our history are doomed to go crazy watching the idiots in the first group.
1- healtcare services will go down in price.....The insurance companies will be forced to offer less in payment for each service. So each procedure will cost less. But with the influx of all these new people with pre-existing conditions...insurance companies will be paying for many more procedures( even though each procedure is cheaper, the total dollars spent in total for all the extra procedures make a net increase in expense)....so guess who gets that cost passed on to them......the consumer
2-as hospitals and caregivers receive less per unit of service....they will have to serve more people in the same anount of time, inorder to make the same amount of money they used to make to cover expenses and makea profit. Rents, salries, insurance, utulities all stay the same or go up...however re-imbursement goes down....something has to give. So as health providers squeeze in more people in order to make up the shortfall....mistakes will be made...and again consumers pay for it by receiving more rushed lower quality care
so the net result.....for those who dont use medical services, the cost of insurance will be very reasonable. For those that use medical services....the quality of services will decrease, and copays and deductables are already increasing.
this is not speculation on my part, or something "i read"....i live it everyday as part of the health care system
the govt gets involved in healthcare, like they are invovled in education. postal service, and amtrack.....all in a shambles.....and healtcare soon to follow.
the govt also got involved in strong arming institutions to provide mortgages to minorities that could not normally qualify.....opening up the floodgates to the housing crisis...
is there anything that the govt inserted itself into that runs better than a private entity would run
Quote: BuzzardMillions of people in the United States travel by airplane every year. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) ensures their safety by regulating the air transportation industry and maintaining a nationwide network of air traffic control systems.
But it could and should be made independent like the USPS.
Quote: AZDuffmanSigh, those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it; those of us who do know our history are doomed to go crazy watching the idiots in the first group.
What infuriates me about these people is that our side was warning them about Obama for over 5 years. And they refused to listen!!! Now they're b*tching and moaning, and it's music to my hears. Hope they suffer in the beds they made themselves.
Quote: AZDuffmanBut it could and should be made independent like the USPS.
exactly!!!!!!!
private companies are petrfied of being sued for a billion dollars.
But joe schmoe working for the federal govt doesnt go home at night worrying about that...the govt can print up a billion to bail out his poor decisions or his indifference in this case of drunken pilots.
a private/public company can be bankrupted by a lawuite....govet agencies no so much.
Just becaue we dont have planes falling out of the sky everyday dioesnt mean the FAA is run efficiently, doesnt mean its run professionally or in the best interest of public safety.
again, look at the banking system, the education system, the postal service, and amtrack.......what makes you think the FAA is any different.
and what makes you think healthcare wont be following soon
Quote: Beethoven9thWhat infuriates me about these people is that our side was warning them about Obama for over 5 years. And they refused to listen!!! Now they're b*tching and moaning, and it's music to my hears. Hope they suffer in the beds they made themselves.
people in healthcare saw this coming,Saw the inferior healthcare to patients being the norm, and kept quiet.
you know the govt overseas healthcare with agencies that can issue big big fines
wink wink
ask the vocal tea party people who got a visit from the IRS
Quote: LarrySis there anything that the govt inserted itself into that runs better than a private entity would run
No problem.
But how many years do you wait for the private industry to prove that it does the job better? Yes, the industry does provide affordable healthcare for some. SOME.
And actually, it's not all that inexpensive either.
Quote: rxwineNo problem.
But how many years do you wait for the private industry to prove that it does the job better? Yes, the industry does provide affordable healthcare for some. SOME.
And actually, it's not all that inexpensive either.
Its NOT my health insurance companies responsibility to make sure EVERYONE gets healthcare. That is not what INSURANCE is all about.
Just as its not the responsibility of my home owners insurance to make sure unfortunate people who cannot afford to insure their home or belongsings against fire or theft are covered after the event occurs. ONCE THE HOME OR BELONGINGS HAS THE PREEXISITING CONDITION OF BEING STOLEN OR BURNED DOWN,...the homeowners insurance company has no moral or legal responsibility to issue a policy retroactively covering the loss.
All of a sudden the govt dictates that insurance companies are responsible to cover the loss of health after the fact. This is not INSURANCE...this is insurance companies being told to issue a welfare program paid for by the rest of us.
If the govt wants unfortunate people to be covered...then they can shift some money away from food stamps, welfare, the arts, space program, etc and maintain health welfare fund for those people.
the govt felt it was imperative that everyone should get to live the american dream and own their own home....That ended up being a bad idea...we will all pay for that for decades
If i own a furnace store in nebraska, and people die every year of exposure becaUSE they cant afford to fix their furnace.....should the govt come to me and order me to sell my firnaces to people who cant afford them at a lower price? Every year people die...is it my responsibility to pay for that..or if the govt feels strongly about it shoud the govt find a fund to help those people.
there are tens of thousands of people every year that lose the bread winner of the family to death....and are driven into poverty.....should life insurance companes be directed to help those people by issuing them a policy after the fact?
that is the antithesis of what INSURANCE is all about
INSURANCE pays for HEALTHCARE.......dont use the terms interchangeably
If the gove wants all people to have healthcare.....then they should provide it...
its not the insurance companies responsibilitie to provide it
Just as its not their responsibility to issue a million dollar death benefit to someone termanilly ill in the intensive care unit
Quote: LarrySIts NOT my health insurance companies responsibility to make sure EVERYONE gets healthcare. That is not what INSURANCE is all about.
Some smart person once said, let's cut out the middleman.
Quote: rxwineSome smart person once said, let's cut out the middleman.
So what are you saying, you like my idea of HSAs and high-deductible cat-plans? Glad to see people are coming around on that.
Quote: AZDuffmanSo what are you saying, you like my idea of HSAs and high-deductible cat-plans? Glad to see people are coming around on that.
I guess a government program is what you get when you never get around to reform in other ways. You can talk talk talk, but that doesn't do nada.
Quote: rxwineI guess a government program is what you get when you never get around to reform in other ways. You can talk talk talk, but that doesn't do nada.
So here we go with the old blame everyone else for Obama's boondoggle gag. Forget it. It doesn't fly.
Maybe we should have done something sooner and talked less. That doesn't mean that they "had" to bring us a plan that is as pathetic as this one.
Quote: rxwineI guess a government program is what you get when you never get around to reform in other ways. You can talk talk talk, but that doesn't do nada.
Reform has been proposed in tort reform, HSAs, and selling insurance across state lines. But too many people think you need "program" for everything.
Quote: RonCSo here we go with the old blame everyone else for Obama's boondoggle gag. Forget it. It doesn't fly.
Don't mistake my comments for complaining. I'm not asking for the program to be repealed.
So, proposals are nothing without the votes.
Quote: AZDuffmanReform has been proposed in tort reform, HSAs, and selling insurance across state lines. But too many people think you need "program" for everything.
exactly..what makes the healthcare system expensive is the lawyers. This is the only country where people can sue hosppitals and practitiones for unlimited amounts of money.
someone spills coffee on themselves in their car with the cup held between their legs...and a jury awards millions.
u can imagine what goes on in the health feild.
all the cost gets passed on to us
Quote: LarrySIf the gove wants all people to have healthcare.....then they should provide it...
its not the insurance companies responsibilitie to provide it
You know, every time I hear someone on the right say something to the effect of "even single-payer would be better than this!" all I can think is, "keikaku doori."
time has gone by since Obamacare was signed into
law, as the time that passed from Pearl Harbor to
when the Germans surrendered in Europe. The same
amount of time to the day.
In that 3 years 6 months in the 40's, we retooled the
entire economy, and produced planes and guns and
bombs and jeeps and trucks and ammo in the millions,
and won the war in Europe. Yet in the same amount
of time, Obama and his minions can't even build a
website or implement a healthcare program.
Ineptitude and incompetence on parade.
Healthcare expenses is governed by lawyers. Unlike any other country, hospitals and doctoprs can be sued for hundreds of millions of dollars for one lawsuit.
Turn on the TV and see how many law firms are advertising for people to join suits against drug companies.
And who pays for this....??? we do.///in higher costs of medicine and medical care.
a jury in the united states awarded a person millions of dollars against Mcdonalds because the coffee that was placed between his/her legs in a car was too hot and scalded the person between the legs.
Imagine what juries award people who get ulcers from medication, or fall down the steps from dizziness from the medication.
Although these are listed side effects of alot of medications...well someone has to pay big time if someone gets these side effects
And the drug companies pay and pass it on to us.
The insurance companies pay and pass it on to doctors in sky hi malpractice insurance premiums...and the doctors in turn pass it on to us
Yes you can get an operation in mexico for half the price here, or a third the price///...BUT IF SOMETHING GOES WRONG YOU CANT GET A 100 MILLION DOLLAR SETTLEMENT
Bush tried to put through "tort reform" but was rejected as the trial lawyers are too strong as lobbyists. Trial lawyers have way too much to lose if those multi million dollar settlements are limted
So the prices are high....but thats not all. Becaue doctors are petrified of multimillion dollar lawsuits....and suffocating increases in their malpractice insurance...they may order a large battery of tests that may not be needed...just to cover their ass...this also drives up the cost of healthcare.
And I didnt even get to the cost of government regulations that add costs to our healthcare on top of the legal issues.
It cost drug companies hundreds of mullions of dollars more to get a drug approved for release in the united states.
Thats what has caused the high cost of health care before obamacare
Now with obamacare.....you aint seen nothin yet
Quote: HeadlockWhat makes healthcare expensive is that too many people think healthcare is free. For everyone on Medicaid, healthcare is free. For everyone on Medicare, healthcare is almost free; the deductibles, coinsurance and supplemental premiums are miniscule in comparison to the costs they incur. Most people with employer provided health insurance think healthcare is free; many of them do not pay their deductibles and coinsurance.
That's not really true. If that were the case, other countries with a two-tier system would see similar prices for voluntary treatments, and they don't. The problem is, for a variety of reasons, the medical industries are using the US as their money tap. Among those reasons:
-Big insurers, public and private, like to haggle, so initial offers have to be raised to compensate.
-Uninsured people with life-threatening conditions are not so keen to haggle, so they pay what they pay.
-Emergency care leads to frequent default, driving up margins.
-The American tort system drives prices up, since even unsuccessful lawsuits often get very expensive.
-Probably most important at this point, we've all just gotten used to the idea that Americans pay more.
There are other reasons, but since Medicare and Medicaid do pay (why do you think they're such a big part of the budget?), they're not the culprits. That doesn't mean changing the system will actually help, though - they still need to make money, and short of the US going under, we're going to be where they get it for the foreseeable future.
I was saying that it would save me over 10% but I was mistaken (I was confusing my car payment at $477 per month with my health insurance payment). The savings is still over 9% and I'll take it.
Thank you President Obama.
Quote: s2dbakerHere's my personal example of how Obamacare helped me. On the top is a screen grab of my bank statement. It was costing me $445.22 per month for Aetna HMO insurance. It's a good plan with good coverage. On the bottom of the screen is what I'll get in January. My current doctor takes BCBS (actually prefers it) and for me, it'll be less expensive and much lower out-of-pocket expenses. It will be a better plan for $403.92 per month. I do not qualify for subsidies so these rates are straight up comparisons.
I was saying that it would save me over 10% but I was mistaken (I was confusing my car payment at $477 per month with my health insurance payment). The savings is still over 9% and I'll take it.
Thank you President Obama.
That's fantastic, thanks for posting this. My healthcare hasn't changed due to affordable care act and that's a good thing because I have great coverage.
All the right does is complain and ignore anything positive. If you wrote an email to foxnews to ask to be interviewed about your experience with the affordable care act, they would ignore you. They are only interested in telling one side of the story.
There are going to be positives and negatives when this gets ironed out for the nation.
Yes, Obamacare has a lot of problems, but there are also a lot of positives.
Just like Rommeney care in Mass., there were positives and negatives but overall Mass. survived and thrived just as the USA will.
Quote: terapined
All the right does is complain and ignore anything positive.
How is forcing people to buy coverages they do not need or want "positive?"
If I can get a cheaper plan without maternity, pediatric, and substance abuse coverage why should I not have that choice.
Maybe to reduce the cost of auto liability insurance, people should have to buy it even if they do not drive?
Quote: AZDuffmanHow is forcing people to buy coverages they do not need or want "positive?"
If I can get a cheaper plan without maternity, pediatric, and substance abuse coverage why should I not have that choice.
Maybe to reduce the cost of auto liability insurance, people should have to buy it even if they do not drive?
You are absolutely right. Your view of being forced to buy coverage is a negative and I totally get that. I disagree but regardless, its a valid point that you view as a negative. The internet system is currently a negative that may become a positive. All I am saying is that there are positives and negatives. s2dbaker experience is a positive. My experience is a positive, no change. Those with pre-existing conditions can get coverage, that's a positive.
All I am saying is there are negatives AND POSITIVES.
Quote: terapinedYou are absolutely right. Your view of being forced to buy coverage is a negative and I totally get that. I disagree but regardless, its a valid point that you view as a negative. The internet system is currently a negative that may become a positive. All I am saying is that there are positives and negatives. s2dbaker experience is a positive. My experience is a positive, no change. Those with pre-existing conditions can get coverage, that's a positive.
All I am saying is there are negatives AND POSITIVES.
A close look at s2dbaker's statements show he was buying COBRA coverage before and now an Obamacare policy. Apples to oranges. My guess is if not for Obamacare he could have shopped around just as easy, maybe even easier as private insurers have websites designed for more than 10 people at a time.
Quote: AZDuffmanA close look at s2dbaker's statements show he was buying COBRA coverage before and now an Obamacare policy. Apples to oranges. My guess is if not for Obamacare he could have shopped around just as easy, maybe even easier as private insurers have websites designed for more than 10 people at a time.
S2dbaker is trying to make a valid point about his experience, And your response is to invalidate with a "geuss"
S2dbaker views this as a positive in his life due to Obamacare. Therefore I view it as a positive for Obamacare. I get your view. You are against all this and that is perfectly reasonable. You have your views and that's great.
Its really like anything else in life, there will be positives and negatives.
I went on tour following the Grateful Dead around. Believe me, it wasn't all a rose garden. There were negatives and positives on being on tour with the Grateful Dead. Just as there will be negatives and positives on Obamacare.
its not really a black and white world, a lot shades of gray.
What happens in two years when the federal subsidies expire and the state becomes responsible for it? How much is this going to impact your state?
Everyone that has studied this issue is well aware that the subsidies are only available in the states that have set up exchanges. This leaves somewhere around 34 states where the subsidies are not available, as written in the law. Obama has decided that he is above the law and applies the subsidies across the board because he knows that Obamacare cannot survive without the subsidies. There are lawsuits proceeding through the courts about this very issue.
Are you supporting the right for politicians to ignore the laws as written, and apply it as they see fit?
Please, no snarky answers. I really want to know how you believe this impacts the viability of this law.
No, that was not my experience. The Cobra policy was my least expensive option.Quote: AZDuffmanA close look at s2dbaker's statements show he was buying COBRA coverage before and now an Obamacare policy. Apples to oranges. My guess is if not for Obamacare he could have shopped around just as easy, maybe even easier as private insurers have websites designed for more than 10 people at a time.
Quote: timberjimI have a couple of questions to the supporters of Obamacare.
What happens in two years when the federal subsidies expire and the state becomes responsible for it? How much is this going to impact your state?
Everyone that has studied this issue is well aware that the subsidies are only available in the states that have set up exchanges. This leaves somewhere around 34 states where the subsidies are not available, as written in the law. Obama has decided that he is above the law and applies the subsidies across the board because he knows that Obamacare cannot survive without the subsidies. There are lawsuits proceeding through the courts about this very issue.
Are you supporting the right for politicians to ignore the laws as written, and apply it as they see fit?
Please, no snarky answers. I really want to know how you believe this impacts the viability of this law.
Ok, I'm a supporter of Obamacare and I'll be real honest.
I don't know what's gonna happen in 2 years. No crystal ball.
You seem like a smart guy by your grasp of details of this Issue that I know nothing about, What is your prediction?
Am I supporting the right of politicians to ignore laws as written and apply as they see fit?
I thought the police and politicians do this all the time.
Quote: terapinedOk, I'm a supporter of Obamacare and I'll be real honest.
I don't know what's gonna happen in 2 years. No crystal ball. What is your prediction?
Am I supporting the right of politicians to ignore laws as written and apply as they see fit?
I thought the police and politicians do this all the time.
So you, by your own admission, have no idea how this law will impact our future, yet you support it and you are comfortable with the US no longer being a country of laws!!!!!!!
I will get in a discussion with someone who will answer these questions, you haven't.
Quote: timberjimSo you, by your own admission, have no idea how this law will impact our future, yet you support it and you are comfortable with the US no longer being a country of laws!!!!!!!
I will get in a discussion with someone who will answer these questions, you haven't.
This is a country of power and sometimes laws.
Sometimes laws are able to triumph over power , sometimes not.
I voted for Obama not sure how it would impact the countrys future.
But if I voted for Macain or Rommney, not sure how it would have impacted the countrys future.
Sorry, no crystal ball.
I have a feeling you are just itching to fulfill a fantasy and get an Obamacare supporter to say, "Hey Timberjim, you were right and I was wrong" LOL.
Aint gonna happen. Get real.
Go USA, what a great country.