Re: [FairfieldLife] Obamacare - trouble at the back end
On 12/18/2013 9:34 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: Man, what the right-wingers are feeding you is such a convoluted mess No "right-winger" is opposed to people getting low cost medical care if they get sick or injured - you made that up and tried to fib us again. What conservatives ARE opposed to is the federal government getting involved in providing health care in the first place, which is way too complex for anyone in the federal government to manage. The disater called Obamacare has already proved that the government can't manage helalth care - hell, they can't even design a workable web site. But, the least they could do is not tell big fat lies to the public: you CANNOT keep your plan if you like it and you CANNOT keep your doctor if you like him, and your health insurance premium is going UP not down!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Obamacare - trouble at the back end
Man, what the right-wingers are feeding you is such a convoluted mess. I don't have time to go dig up the specifics to refute all this. But have a look here: http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/obamacare-s-unlikely-winners-20131217 http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/obamacare-s-unlikely-winners-20131217 BTW, you're aware that the basis of Obamacare started out as a Republican idea, right? I never said I wanted the GOP/Tea Party to "fix" it, only to stop sabotaging it. They are obviously terrified that it is going to improve the healthcare situation, and they're doing everything they can to get in the way of that happening because they hate Obama so much. It's truly pathological: they'd rather Obama looked bad than that folks have better healthcare. The individual mandate, by the way, is crucial. Without it, young, healthy people won't buy in, and the insurance companies will go into the "death spiral"--although at this point, it looks like enough young people are buying in to prevent that: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/12/17/why-obamacare-wont-spiral-into-fiery-actuarial-doom/?wprss=rss_business&clsrd http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/12/17/why-obamacare-wont-spiral-into-fiery-actuarial-doom/?wprss=rss_business&clsrd Yes, the whole idea is for the healthy to help subsidize the sick. That's the principle of insurance, to spread the risk. The young folks who are now healthy will get sicker as they age, and their healthcare will in turn be subsidized by the younger people. Plus which, there's no guarantee a young person isn't going to get sick or have some sort of accident and require healthcare, and if they have insurance, it's a lot less likely to bankrupt them. And the government subsidies are designed to make it possible for everyone to have insurance whatever their income. (Of course in the states that have refused to go along with Obamacare's Medicaid expansion, a lot of poor people will be out of luck because they can get neither Medicaid nor government subsidies--that's one aspect of what I mean by GOP sabotage.) Give it a chance, for pete's sake. A program this huge and complicated is going to have some problems no matter what, but we have to know for sure what they are before things can be tweaked to handle them. The solution sure isn't to chuck the whole thing before the problems have even shown up. Mike wrote: And the administration has made their share of *purported* facts as well, that insurance rates will go down and so on. Yes, they will go down for a few, and it will be *better* for a few, who get government subsidies but the rest of us will absorb the cost for their gain. It is a fact that almost 6 million people have had their plans canceled because they now don't qualify as *up to standard* under Obamacare. The aadministration wants more coverage, perhaps coverage they don't need, want or can afford but must pay for so others can have it at a cheaper rate. Next year, after the elections , many companies will face the same predicament, cancel old plans for more expensive ones. As for Fox and Republicans trying to sabotage Obamacare, Fox is reporting what people are experiencing and the republicans owe nothing because they were shut-out from creating the law in the first place. This was a Democratic baby that SHOULD have been aborted.Now, you and other Democrats want Republicans to fix it? Republicans asked for delays which were only done to avert a disaster which is yet to come. The administration delayed employer mandates until after the elections. The Republicans asked for a delay of the individual mandate, which was denied and now we see nobody was ready. for that as well. Obviously, you as Obama, have never run a business. Who would want to expand a small business with more full time employees if it were going to significantly raise it's cost of doing business, maybe even to the point of non profitability. The obvious solution is to hire more part- time and hold them to less than 30 hours. The administration counters with, *there's no indication that this would be the case*. No. they'll just have to wait for unemployment to rise or job creation to stagnate to get those figures they need. Then we'll need to pass more laws *fixing* it. More government regulation. It'll just go on and on and on. On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 8:01 AM, "authfriend@..." wrote: Opinion "again"? But you were declaring all kinds of purported facts to start with: "Most people's premiums are going way up and their deductibles are doubling and even tripling so a few can have a policy that they still can't afford with deductibles they still can't pay! Just wait till next year when the employer mandates go into effect and people are limited to part time jobs of less than 29 hours a week!" Mike wrote: "Obamacare is far better than what we had before". Again
Re: [FairfieldLife] Obamacare - trouble at the back end
And the administration has made their share of *purported* facts as well, that insurance rates will go down and so on. Yes, they will go down for a few, and it will be *better* for a few, who get government subsidies but the rest of us will absorb the cost for their gain. It is a fact that almost 6 million people have had their plans canceled because they now don't qualify as *up to standard* under Obamacare. The aadministration wants more coverage, perhaps coverage they don't need, want or can afford but must pay for so others can have it at a cheaper rate. Next year, after the elections , many companies will face the same predicament, cancel old plans for more expensive ones. As for Fox and Republicans trying to sabotage Obamacare, Fox is reporting what people are experiencing and the republicans owe nothing because they were shut-out from creating the law in the first place. This was a Democratic baby that SHOULD have been aborted.Now, you and other Democrats want Republicans to fix it? Republicans asked for delays which were only done to avert a disaster which is yet to come. The administration delayed employer mandates until after the elections. The Republicans asked for a delay of the individual mandate, which was denied and now we see nobody was ready. for that as well. Obviously, you as Obama, have never run a business. Who would want to expand a small business with more full time employees if it were going to significantly raise it's cost of doing business, maybe even to the point of non profitability. The obvious solution is to hire more part- time and hold them to less than 30 hours. The administration counters with, *there's no indication that this would be the case*. No. they'll just have to wait for unemployment to rise or job creation to stagnate to get those figures they need. Then we'll need to pass more laws *fixing* it. More government regulation. It'll just go on and on and on. On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 8:01 AM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" wrote: Opinion "again"? But you were declaring all kinds of purported facts to start with: "Most people's premiums are going way up and their deductibles are doubling and even tripling so a few can have a policy that they still can't afford with deductibles they still can't pay! Just wait till next year when the employer mandates go into effect and people are limited to part time jobs of less than 29 hours a week!" Mike wrote: "Obamacare is far better than what we had before". Again, a matter of opinion. On Monday, December 16, 2013 8:36 AM, "authfriend@..." wrote: Mike wrote: << I guess "many more people will be helped, than hurt, by Obamacare" is subject to interpretation, just as, "if you like your insurance , you can keep it and if you like your doctor, you can keep him/her" is interpreted. >> No relationship, sorry. << It's getting harder to defend the indefensible. That's why "we had to pass it before we could see what's in it". >> Non sequitur. < < Wait till next year , babe!< As I said in an earlier post, Obamacare was meant to fail. It's a spring- board for the demand to replace it with *universal health-care* and that will be the *great social equalizer*, except for the ruling elite , of course. >> If only. What nonsense, Mike. Obamacare was designed to avoid going to single-payer. That's one of my biggest complaints against Obama: he pretended he was in favor of a single-payer-type option when in fact he was making deals in secrecy with Big Health and Big Insurance to ensure it wouldn't happen. Obamacare is faute-de-mieux, and it has its problems, but it's still far, far better than what we had. And it could be better still if the GOP and Tea Party, along with Faux News, weren't doing their damndest to sabotage it. On Monday, December 16, 2013 6:51 AM, "authfriend@..." wrote: You really need to expand your horizons beyond Faux News, Mike. Many, many more people will be helped than hurt by Obamacare. The folks you should be worrying about are the ones who live in states where the GOP has rejected Medicaid expansion. Mike wrote: << Dude! You were all warned! LOL! Most people's premiums are going way up and their deductibles are doubling and even tripling so a few can have a policy that they still can't afford with deductibles they still can't pay! Just wait till next year when the employer mandates go into effect and people are limited to part time jobs of less than 29 hours a week! This law was brought to you by your Democratic Party! Not one Republican voted for it, they saw it coming! >> On Sunday, December 15, 2013 4:28 PM, "yifuxero@..." wrote: Obamacare - trouble at the back end, for sure. http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/56913.jpg
Re: [FairfieldLife] Obamacare - trouble at the back end
Opinion "again"? But you were declaring all kinds of purported facts to start with: "Most people's premiums are going way up and their deductibles are doubling and even tripling so a few can have a policy that they still can't afford with deductibles they still can't pay! Just wait till next year when the employer mandates go into effect and people are limited to part time jobs of less than 29 hours a week!" Mike wrote: "Obamacare is far better than what we had before". Again, a matter of opinion. On Monday, December 16, 2013 8:36 AM, "authfriend@..." wrote: Mike wrote: << I guess "many more people will be helped, than hurt, by Obamacare" is subject to interpretation, just as, "if you like your insurance , you can keep it and if you like your doctor, you can keep him/her" is interpreted. >> No relationship, sorry. << It's getting harder to defend the indefensible. That's why "we had to pass it before we could see what's in it". >> Non sequitur. < < Wait till next year , babe!< As I said in an earlier post, Obamacare was meant to fail. It's a spring- board for the demand to replace it with *universal health-care* and that will be the *great social equalizer*, except for the ruling elite , of course. >> If only. What nonsense, Mike. Obamacare was designed to avoid going to single-payer. That's one of my biggest complaints against Obama: he pretended he was in favor of a single-payer-type option when in fact he was making deals in secrecy with Big Health and Big Insurance to ensure it wouldn't happen. Obamacare is faute-de-mieux, and it has its problems, but it's still far, far better than what we had. And it could be better still if the GOP and Tea Party, along with Faux News, weren't doing their damndest to sabotage it. On Monday, December 16, 2013 6:51 AM, "authfriend@..." wrote: You really need to expand your horizons beyond Faux News, Mike. Many, many more people will be helped than hurt by Obamacare. The folks you should be worrying about are the ones who live in states where the GOP has rejected Medicaid expansion. Mike wrote: << Dude! You were all warned! LOL! Most people's premiums are going way up and their deductibles are doubling and even tripling so a few can have a policy that they still can't afford with deductibles they still can't pay! Just wait till next year when the employer mandates go into effect and people are limited to part time jobs of less than 29 hours a week! This law was brought to you by your Democratic Party! Not one Republican voted for it, they saw it coming! >> On Sunday, December 15, 2013 4:28 PM, "yifuxero@..." wrote: Obamacare - trouble at the back end, for sure. http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/56913.jpg http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/56913.jpg
Re: [FairfieldLife] Obamacare - trouble at the back end
"Obamacare is far better than what we had before". Again, a matter of opinion. On Monday, December 16, 2013 8:36 AM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" wrote: Mike wrote: << I guess "many more people will be helped, than hurt, by Obamacare" is subject to interpretation, just as, "if you like your insurance , you can keep it and if you like your doctor, you can keep him/her" is interpreted. >> No relationship, sorry. << It's getting harder to defend the indefensible. That's why "we had to pass it before we could see what's in it". >> Non sequitur. < < Wait till next year , babe!< As I said in an earlier post, Obamacare was meant to fail. It's a spring- board for the demand to replace it with *universal health-care* and that will be the *great social equalizer*, except for the ruling elite , of course. >> If only. What nonsense, Mike. Obamacare was designed to avoid going to single-payer. That's one of my biggest complaints against Obama: he pretended he was in favor of a single-payer-type option when in fact he was making deals in secrecy with Big Health and Big Insurance to ensure it wouldn't happen. Obamacare is faute-de-mieux, and it has its problems, but it's still far, far better than what we had. And it could be better still if the GOP and Tea Party, along with Faux News, weren't doing their damndest to sabotage it. On Monday, December 16, 2013 6:51 AM, "authfriend@..." wrote: You really need to expand your horizons beyond Faux News, Mike. Many, many more people will be helped than hurt by Obamacare. The folks you should be worrying about are the ones who live in states where the GOP has rejected Medicaid expansion. Mike wrote: << Dude! You were all warned! LOL! Most people's premiums are going way up and their deductibles are doubling and even tripling so a few can have a policy that they still can't afford with deductibles they still can't pay! Just wait till next year when the employer mandates go into effect and people are limited to part time jobs of less than 29 hours a week! This law was brought to you by your Democratic Party! Not one Republican voted for it, they saw it coming! >> On Sunday, December 15, 2013 4:28 PM, "yifuxero@..." wrote: Obamacare - trouble at the back end, for sure. http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/56913.jpg
Re: [FairfieldLife] Obamacare - trouble at the back end
Mike wrote: << I guess "many more people will be helped, than hurt, by Obamacare" is subject to interpretation, just as, "if you like your insurance , you can keep it and if you like your doctor, you can keep him/her" is interpreted. >> No relationship, sorry. << It's getting harder to defend the indefensible. That's why "we had to pass it before we could see what's in it". >> Non sequitur. < < Wait till next year , babe!< As I said in an earlier post, Obamacare was meant to fail. It's a spring- board for the demand to replace it with *universal health-care* and that will be the *great social equalizer*, except for the ruling elite , of course. >> If only. What nonsense, Mike. Obamacare was designed to avoid going to single-payer. That's one of my biggest complaints against Obama: he pretended he was in favor of a single-payer-type option when in fact he was making deals in secrecy with Big Health and Big Insurance to ensure it wouldn't happen. Obamacare is faute-de-mieux, and it has its problems, but it's still far, far better than what we had. And it could be better still if the GOP and Tea Party, along with Faux News, weren't doing their damndest to sabotage it. On Monday, December 16, 2013 6:51 AM, "authfriend@..." wrote: You really need to expand your horizons beyond Faux News, Mike. Many, many more people will be helped than hurt by Obamacare. The folks you should be worrying about are the ones who live in states where the GOP has rejected Medicaid expansion. Mike wrote: << Dude! You were all warned! LOL! Most people's premiums are going way up and their deductibles are doubling and even tripling so a few can have a policy that they still can't afford with deductibles they still can't pay! Just wait till next year when the employer mandates go into effect and people are limited to part time jobs of less than 29 hours a week! This law was brought to you by your Democratic Party! Not one Republican voted for it, they saw it coming! >> On Sunday, December 15, 2013 4:28 PM, "yifuxero@..." wrote: Obamacare - trouble at the back end, for sure. http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/56913.jpg http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/56913.jpg
Re: [FairfieldLife] Obamacare - trouble at the back end
I guess "many more people will be helped, than hurt, by Obamacare" is subject to interpretation, just as, "if you like your insurance , you can keep it and if you like your doctor, you can keep him/her" is interpreted.< It's getting harder to defend the indefensible. That's why "we had to pass it before we could see what's in it".< Wait till next year , babe!< As I said in an earlier post, Obamacare was meant to fail. It's a spring- board for the demand to replace it with *universal health-care* and that will be the *great social equalizer*, except for the ruling elite , of course. On Monday, December 16, 2013 6:51 AM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" wrote: You really need to expand your horizons beyond Faux News, Mike. Many, many more people will be helped than hurt by Obamacare. The folks you should be worrying about are the ones who live in states where the GOP has rejected Medicaid expansion. Mike wrote: << Dude! You were all warned! LOL! Most people's premiums are going way up and their deductibles are doubling and even tripling so a few can have a policy that they still can't afford with deductibles they still can't pay! Just wait till next year when the employer mandates go into effect and people are limited to part time jobs of less than 29 hours a week! This law was brought to you by your Democratic Party! Not one Republican voted for it, they saw it coming! >> On Sunday, December 15, 2013 4:28 PM, "yifuxero@..." wrote: Obamacare - trouble at the back end, for sure. http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/56913.jpg
Re: [FairfieldLife] Obamacare - trouble at the back end
You really need to expand your horizons beyond Faux News, Mike. Many, many more people will be helped than hurt by Obamacare. The folks you should be worrying about are the ones who live in states where the GOP has rejected Medicaid expansion. Mike wrote: << Dude! You were all warned! LOL! Most people's premiums are going way up and their deductibles are doubling and even tripling so a few can have a policy that they still can't afford with deductibles they still can't pay! Just wait till next year when the employer mandates go into effect and people are limited to part time jobs of less than 29 hours a week! This law was brought to you by your Democratic Party! Not one Republican voted for it, they saw it coming! >> On Sunday, December 15, 2013 4:28 PM, "yifuxero@..." wrote: Obamacare - trouble at the back end, for sure. http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/56913.jpg http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/56913.jpg
Re: [FairfieldLife] Obamacare - trouble at the back end
Dude! You were all warned! LOL! Most people's premiums are going way up and their deductibles are doubling and even tripling so a few can have a policy that they still can't afford with deductibles they still can't pay! Just wait till next year when the employer mandates go into effect and people are limited to part time jobs of less than 29 hours a week! This law was brought to you by your Democratic Party! Not one Republican voted for it, they saw it coming! On Sunday, December 15, 2013 4:28 PM, "yifux...@yahoo.com" wrote: Obamacare - trouble at the back end, for sure. http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/56913.jpg
