Obamacare: Say goodnight, Gracie...

[Kutnupe14]

I think you give Obama too much credit. It would have been met with the same resistance if Hillary put it through, or anyone else.

Undoubtedly. If it had of been Clinton-, Pelosi-, Reid- or (name your hated Democrat) -Care, it would have been equally as hated. The name carries more opposition than the program itself, as evidenced by the number of people who like/use ACA but dislike Obamacare.

 

[Ericpwp]

I'm sure there are people that don't know there isn't a difference. But it is against the law not to get covered. Signing up for an exchange plan and hating the ACA are not mutually exclusive. It does not prove one's hypocrisy, only one's ability to follow the law.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I'm sure there are people that don't know there isn't a difference. But it is against the law not to get covered. Signing up for an exchange plan and hating the ACA are not mutually exclusive. It does not prove one's hypocrisy, only one's ability to follow the law.

Not everyone is on ACA. Obviously people have their own coverages and don't need to use ACA, or they benefit from a provision that doesn't require participation in the exchanges.

For Example.....
[video=youtube;sx2scvIFGjE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx2scvIFGjE[/video]

and before someone says the people interviewed are cherry picked (which is undoubtedly true), let's say these 6 people with no clue, are 6 people out of 600. That's 1%, hardly insignificant.

 

[Ericpwp]

The individual mandate is the aca, whether you get covered through the exchange or not. The fact that people don't know how they were affected by the aca does not mean they weren't.

 

[Kutnupe14]

The individual mandate is the aca, whether you get covered through the exchange or not. The fact that people don't know how they were affected by the aca does not mean they weren't.

Which goes back to fact that they are ignorant of the provisions of ACA, and opposed it because of the person it is associated with, rather the knowing what it did, hammered home by the fact that they are being affected by it, but didn't know they were affected by it.

 

[Ericpwp]

Again, the two are not mutually exclusive. I know I had a great HMO that I never used except for some imaging and stiches from hockey injuries. Now I have an expensive ppo that I don't use and the imaging costs me a lot more to boot.

 

[rhino]

I'm sure there are people that don't know there isn't a difference. But it is against the law not to get covered. Signing up for an exchange plan and hating the ACA are not mutually exclusive. It does not prove one's hypocrisy, only one's ability to follow the law.

When I lost my private health insurance policy due to Obamacare, I had to get new private health insurance both to have something in place as well as to conform to the blatantly unconstitutional law. I got a policy directly from a provider, not through the exchange (which was not working at the time). I don't recall anyone asking me about political party affiliation when I purchased my policy, but they would not have received a response since I have none.

Now I am fortunate enough to have health insurance through my employer, which I got before all of the mandates hit the employers. My current deductible is 7.2 times what it was with the pre-Obamacare version, which was lost because the deductible was too low and would have resulted in a 40% penalty on the part of the employer. That kind of sucks when x-rays of your knees cost about $1K not including the fee from the radiologist. I can't imagine the stress on people whose deductibles are now $10K or $15K or even higher. That would be less onerous if they were paying premiums commensurate with a catastrophic policy only, but they're not.

 

[bwframe]

Thank you John McCain

[video=youtube;x3jZxdJj-dM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3jZxdJj-dM[/video]

 

[Kutnupe14]

Thank you John McCain

[video=youtube;x3jZxdJj-dM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3jZxdJj-dM[/video]

+1

 

[Twangbanger]

Honestly, and this is the best one can hope for, is amnesty for all here illegally now, and then a VERY hard line on future illegal immigrants. The Democrats/Republicans will accept amnesty if there was legislation that clamped down on legal immigration, anchor babies, and implemented STIFF penalties for illegal immigration.

How exactly do you propose to clamp down on Anchor Babies, via legislation? This is the problem with people like you, positing that amnesty is inevitable. You offer up solutions as bargaining chips, that aren't even possible. Go read Constitution, Amendment XIV. Anchor Babies are citizens. Kinda hard to fix that legislatively, isn't it?

And just what "STIFF" illegal immigration penalties do you propose, for people who aren't citizens, and which we haven't already tried? The Death Penalty? All you can really do is kick them out. And we're told there's even a time limit on that. People like T. Lex tell us they're the lowest sort of scoundrel...until they've been here long enough to hire a lawyer (like him). Apparently, somewhere during that span, they become "pillars of society."

...In (Trump's) absence, we would have had ¡Jeb! shoved up our asses, who in turn would have had his ass handed to him in the general election just like Romney, McStupid, and Dole, and so far as I am concerned, anyone with half a brain should be able to see that pattern where the media carries the weakest Republican who can manage to get any traction in order to set him up for the kill in November...

That's exactly what the media did in this election - carried the weakest Republican whom they thought would get slaughtered. They just got it wrong, this time. They miscalculated, they know it, and it hurts them...bad. To use the famous phrase, they were "too smart, by half." If the media would just have ignored Trump during the primary, he would have been the White Herman Cain. But so sure were they, in giving him free media and shining the flashlight on him, that they were torpedo-ing the GOP's Congressional chances overall, it never occurred to them they were providing a Trump Presidency with the oxygen it needed to survive, right at the precise instant they could / should have been snuffing him out. This is their "Silence of the Lambs;" they will always have to live with the realization of the role they played in this.

 

[Kutnupe14]

How exactly do you propose to clamp down on Anchor Babies, via legislation? This is the problem with people like you, positing that amnesty is inevitable. You offer up solutions as bargaining chips, that aren't even possible. Go read Constitution, Amendment XIV. Anchor Babies are citizens. Kinda hard to fix that legislatively, isn't it?

It IS inevitable, and becoming more so with each passing day. You either need to fix it now, and place limits on it, or it will never be remedied. The people that oppose amnesty are rapidly falling by the wayside, and decreasing in numbers. almost 8% of all new American births are Anchor Babies.

 

[Twangbanger]

So, where do you start? No Surgeon General. No FDA?

I wonder what the "free market" would look like. Unless you get rid of patent protection...which is also a government program...you don't have a free market and we get $1000 epi-pen and $89,000/annual deflazacort pharma barons increasing your med prices across the board.

9% of Americans are diabetics. Are they all democrats?

If taken at face value, this graphic is simply another reason Republicans don't want to do anything. They didn't want to be the vote that took away someone's healthcare when Obamacare passed. And they don't want to be that vote now. They don't want small government, and deep down, they don't think their constituents do, either. There is a point where that ethic gets tested. Republicans don't want to be that point. When talk is the order of the day, they'll support talk. When you start doing something, is when the problem begins.

They realize most people don't want small government. They want talk about small government. And that's what they provide.

Remember: to them, the only thing wrong with Obamacare, is that Democrats passed it.

 

[BugI02]

The graphic depicts enrollment through exchanges.

The remainder are all interesting questions. Have you heard of Google?

Yes

I'm not all that interested in debating the topic or doing further work. I think you may be wrapping yourself around the metric axle at this point. Look at the Kaiser research and go from there. It may or may not solve your accounting issue.

I was. From the CNN article you lifted the graphic from:

About 6.3 million, or 55%, of Obamacare enrollees live in districts with a Republican representative, compared with the 5.2 million who live in Democrat-led districts, the Kaiser Family Foundation report found. As of March 2016, 11.5 million people participated on the Obamacare exchanges.

It took about 2 minutes. They count a person as a Republican on Obamacare if they merely live in a congressional district represented by A Republican, same for the Democrat count.

Not anywhere near sufficiently granular, not scientific, not even honest

Nice post!

 

[Kutnupe14]

Well looks like the Republicans are going to fail again. But who knows, maybe they can sweeten the deal for some of the holdouts, and get it done. If this doesn't pass, you can't hep but think the GOP is full of a bunch of idiots for bringing this to the table again.
Then again, the president hasn't been pushing this legislation, either. It's like he expects it to land on his desk so he can sign it. He seems uncommonly lazy for a president. He rarely addresses the nation, he doesn't push legislation he wants by appealing to the people, and his cabinet still hasn't been filled. He simply doesn't seem that interested in governing.... which I guess is a good thing.

 

[Alpo]

Yes



I was. From the CNN article you lifted the graphic from:


It took about 2 minutes. They count a person as a Republican on Obamacare if they merely live in a congressional district represented by A Republican, same for the Democrat count.

Not anywhere near sufficiently granular, not scientific, not even honest

Nice post!

The realm of possibilities does not exclude your disproof, but your objections are only that. I'm sure if you sleep on it, you'll see the possible argument to your conclusions. Drill down as deep as you wish. Over and out.

 

[BugI02]

See if this seems familiar

Surprise! Some Republicans represent lots of Obamacare enrollees - Jan. 10, 2017

 

[Alpo]

See if this seems familiar

Surprise! Some Republicans represent lots of Obamacare enrollees - Jan. 10, 2017

Looks like the General Opposition Party believed me rather than you.

Seven years they've been at it. Seven years of highly unproductive effort and wasted money. The accomplishments of the GOP can be had on one finger.


ps. Don't forget to turn out the lights when you leave the building.

 

[Ericpwp]

The middle one named Neil Gorsuch?

 

[BugI02]

Looks like the General Opposition Party believed me rather than you.

Seven years they've been at it. Seven years of highly unproductive effort and wasted money. The accomplishments of the GOP can be had on one finger.


ps. Don't forget to turn out the lights when you leave the building.

Yep, the finger in the dike of American values stemming the progressivism leak. Reagan was the original "Dutch" boy

 

[actaeon277]

The accomplishments of either party do not impress me.