New, Improved Obamacare Program Released On 35 Floppy Disks

[madanthonywayne]

Here's something Obama has accomplished with his healthcare plan, he's convinced a majority of Americans that the government should not attempt to guarantee universal coverage:

PS. It turns out that the woman cited by the president as an Obamacare success story can't afford the insurance available on the exchange and will instead be forced to pay the fine and go without insurance coverage. She was one of many people in Washington State to have been given incorrect information regarding what their subsidy would be:

"This is it. I'm not getting insurance," Sanford told CNN. "That's where it stands right now unless they fix it."

"Wow. You guys really screwed me over," Sanford wrote. "Now I have been priced out and will not be able to afford the plans you offer. But, I get to pay $95 and up for not having health insurance. I am so incredibly disappointed and saddened. You majorly screwed up."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...-success-story-frustrated-by-sign-up-process/

 

[iceaura]

Here's something Obama has accomplished with his healthcare plan, he's convinced a majority of Americans that the government should not attempt to guarantee universal coverage:

Oh c'mon, don't be shy - we all know where the convincing came from on that one: you and your Fox News Tea Party pals, backed by hundreds of millions of dollars in lobbying money from your corporate support in the for profit health care and insurance industries, and parroted by all those folks who want to keep their pre-Crash tax cuts. Look at the timeline - during W's last three years in office mistrust in government doing that (or anything) jumped by twenty points; it's only risen another 6 points in the four years since, despite continual propaganda on all major media.

The same people who just lately cut the food stamp allowance for a million veterans of American wars, worked so hard to keep BP and its executives from suffering unduly after the blowout, vetoed all attempts to hold the fraudulent contractors in Iraq to account, and welcomed the extension of free speech protections to large sums of influence money. You know - patriots.

 

[Russ_Watters]

The problem with the free market taking on healthcare is that the best care goes to those most able to afford it.
The rest are left with the inexperienced, and those who couldn't make it.
The ideal, surely, is to have very good healthcare for the whole population.
The best surgeons should be taking on the most difficult cases, not the richest patients.

Why?

 

[paddoboy]

The problem with the free market taking on healthcare is that the best care goes to those most able to afford it.
The rest are left with the inexperienced, and those who couldn't make it.
The ideal, surely, is to have very good healthcare for the whole population.
The best surgeons should be taking on the most difficult cases, not the richest patients.

Well said.

 

[Captain Kremmen]

Why?

I assume you mean the final comment.
Because it's the best use of their talents.

 

[Captain Kremmen]

Here's something Obama has accomplished with his healthcare plan, he's convinced a majority of Americans that the government should not attempt to guarantee universal coverage:

That's odd. I found this graph:

The numbers are the same, but the years don't match.
I wonder if someone has slipped in an extra year in your graph, to show a recent poll?
Something is wrong anyway.
Mine is from the Gallup site. http://www.gallup.com/poll/4708/healthcare-system.aspx
Where is yours from?

 

[Captain Kremmen]

Yes, the can and that is at the root of our current problems. States that have adopted Obamacare are doing well. States that have opted out of state exchanges and Medicaid expansions (i.e. Republican controlled states) is the cause of our current Obamacare woes.

So, if they can opt out, what are they moaning about?
But I don't think you can blame the problems on states opting out.

 

[madanthonywayne]

That's odd. I found this graph:

The numbers are the same, but the years don't match.
I wonder if someone has slipped in an extra year in your graph, to show a recent poll?
Something is wrong anyway.
Mine is from the Gallup site. http://www.gallup.com/poll/4708/healthcare-system.aspx
Where is yours from?

My graph is also from the gallup site, here's the link:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/165917/majority-say-healthcare-not-gov-responsibility.aspx

So, if they can opt out, what are they moaning about?
But I don't think you can blame the problems on states opting out.

You don't have that quite right. No state can "opt out" of Obamacare (unfortunately). They can, however, opt out of the Medicaid expansion that is part of it. Also, each state can choose to set up their own Obamacare exchange, or they can let the federal government do it.

Since Obamacare was passed without a single vote from Republicans (unlike any other major program in US history), Republicans have wanted nothing to do with it. Therefore, 36 states have chosen to let the feds set up the exchanges for their state.

So the kernel of truth in what Joe said is that the incredible incompetence of the federal government under president Obama is affecting those in states with federal exchanges more than those in states that set up their own exchanges. However, issues like millions of people having the insurance they liked canceled affects people in every state. Also, as the story I mentioned above regarding Obama's poster child Obamacare success story who actually can not afford the insurance offered on the exchange makes clear, it's not exactly smooth sailing in states that have set up their own exchanges.

These problems are likely to continue and even increase as Obamacare comes more fully into effect. Many of those who get their insurance thru their employer and think that their insurance plans are safe, are in for a rude awakening in 2014.

First the administration delayed the employer mandate, which, now starting in 2015, will force employers with more than fifty quasi-full-time employees to provide health insurance or pay a new tax. The administration’s decision to delay the mandate, welcome as it may have been to businesses that gained an additional year to deal with the new regulations and obligations they will face, will almost surely lead to political damage at a very unhelpful time. Right before the 2014 midterm elections, about half of all employer plans would have to be canceled or replaced. This would show an immense number of Americans, more than ten times as many as those who are now receiving individual-market cancellation notices, that the administration’s promises that you can keep your doctor were false, and it will show them this in a direct, personal manner.

http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/the-deepening-obamacare-death-spiral-9435

 

[joepistole]

So, if they can opt out, what are they moaning about?
But I don't think you can blame the problems on states opting out.

Republican are moaning because it gains them some political advantage. It allows them to paint Obama as incompetent and untrustworthy. For the first time in nearly 5 years Republicans have a legitimate Obama screw-up. Republicans are almost orgasmic, after 5 years of faux Obama scandals, Obama offers them a real screw-up for their political guns. Obama has screwed-up the rollout of Obamacare (i.e. the Affordable Care Act). Obama has admitted it. He knew he needed to develop a functional national exchange because he knew Republican states would try to do everything possible to sabotage the Affordable Care Act.

If the Republican states who opted out of the state exchanges, and who opted out of the Medicaid expansions, and who chose not to offer another plan to achieve the same results, been more interested in the welfare of their constituents and less interested in playing partisan politics, the roll-out problems would be almost nonexistent.

Here is the real problem for Republicans, states who have implemented Obamcare, and have complied with the law, are doing well (e.g. California). The Massachusetts’s healthcare plan, the Obamacare template, has been around for years and it has been very successful. So we know Obamacare works. It is just a matter of implementing it. Those socialist fascist Swiss capitalist masters have implemented a similar healthcare model and it too has been successful.

* Republicans like to portray anyone, including the Swiss, who support Obamacare type national healthcare plans as socialists and fascists except when Republicans do it like in Massachusetts and Medicare Part D.

 

[madanthonywayne]

Obamacare and the Prisoner's dilemma

An interesting article that describes the fix insurance companies and democratic lawmakers are in as a classic prisoner's dilemma.

In this classic game-theory case, you and a professional associate are both arrested for theft. If neither of you talks, then you’ll probably get off. But if just one of you talks, then the person who talks will get a reduced sentence, while the other person has the book thrown at them. If you both talk, then both of you go to jail for a long time. The equilibrium is for both of you to talk, just in case the other guy does . . . which is why criminal gangs go to such elaborate lengths to build up trust and dispense punishment for snitches.

Insurers and Democrats are now in a similar situation. Legislators need insurers to help them make this law work by staying in the market and selling policies for affordable premiums. Insurers need legislators to hold this law together, particularly the individual mandate. If both of them hold strong, then Democrats have their best chance to get Obamacare working, and they can hope that voters like it so they can win re-election. Insurers, meanwhile, get a system in which the public is legally required to buy their product.

But if you think the other side might waver, then your best move is to defect immediately. If insurers stand strong but politicians end up repealing the mandate, then they will have lost a bunch of money for nothing. If politicians stand strong but insurers raise prices and/or exit the market, they’ll get slaughtered at the polls.

The moment that it looks like there’s a big risk that Obamacare won’t work, both Democrats and insurers are going to stampede for the exit. Yes, Obama can veto anything that threatens his favorite law. But if it gets that far, he’s already lost. His veto will cost his party big in the 2014 midterms, quite possibly enough to cost them the Senate. But by then it will probably be irrelevant, because if Obama has to veto something like a bipartisan bill to delay or repeal the individual mandate, his presidency will be over, and his signature legislation will be in grave danger. Insurers were willing to risk fairly substantial losses in 2014 to help the law get established and build market share. If it looks like the law is going to fail, they probably aren’t going to be willing to do it again in 2015.
There’s an added wrinkle to this prisoner’s dilemma, which is that outside events can intervene to screw up the law even if the two main parties hold together. Republicans could get big wins in 2014, which is effectively the same as a defection by Democratic legislators; young, healthy customers could simply ignore the mandate, which would force insurers to raise rates even if they would rather not. Both of these scenarios increase the risk that one side will defect, pushing both into the bad equilibrium in which Washington starts dismantling the bill and insurers pull out or raise rates.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-19/wishful-thinking-can-t-hold-obamacare-together.html

So will they hold together? Democrats are definitely running scared. At a recent meeting on capital hill, one staffer said:

“Here we are, we’re supposed to be selling this to people, and it’s all screwed up,” one chief of staff ranted. “This either gets fixed or this could be the demise of the Democratic Party.
http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatc...90844-obama-hits-new-low-with-dems-at-capitol

 

[joepistole]

My graph is also from the gallup site, here's the link:

Except for one little detail, the question asked doesn’t apply to The Affordable Care Act (i.e. Obamacare). The Affordable Care Act does not guarantee universal care. It allows for universal access to affordable healthcare if it is fully implemented. Republican rejection of the Medicaid expansion nullifies any possibility of universal healthcare access in Republican dominated states. It also degrades the overall quality of healthcare and raises healthcare costs in those states.

It’s important to note here, that the ability of states to reject the Medicaid expansion was not and is not a part of Obamacare. It was a change made by Republicans on the US Supreme Court. The US Supreme Court is controlled by Republicans.

You don't have that quite right. No state can "opt out" of Obamacare (unfortunately). They can, however, opt out of the Medicaid expansion that is part of it. Also, each state can choose to set up their own Obamacare exchange, or they can let the federal government do it.

Yes they can opt out of Obamacare, but here is the rub. They have to replace it with something that can reasonably be expected to provide a similar result…universal affordable access to certain minimal levels of healthcare.

Since Obamacare was passed without a single vote from Republicans (unlike any other major program in US history), Republicans have wanted nothing to do with it. Therefore, 36 states have chosen to let the feds set up the exchanges for their state.

Ah, yeah. And the question is why. Obamacare was the Republican alternative to Hillarycare for more than a decade. It was the Republican alternative in 2005 and 2006 when Romney care was signed into law by a Republican governor and heralded by former Republican House Speaker Gingrich both of whom went on to run for POTUS and that Republican governor was the Republican presidential nominee last year. Romneycare was fine for Republicans before Democrats signed onto it.

Incidentally, Democrats bent over backwards in order to accommodate Republicans when they drafted and passed The Affordable Care Act (i.e. Obamacare). Obamacare includes more than 300 Republican sponsored amendments.

So the kernel of truth in what Joe said is that the incredible incompetence of the federal government under president Obama is affecting those in states with federal exchanges more than those in states that set up their own exchanges. However, issues like millions of people having the insurance they liked canceled affects people in every state. Also, as the story I mentioned above regarding Obama's poster child Obamacare success story who actually can not afford the insurance offered on the exchange makes clear, it's not exactly smooth sailing in states that have set up their own exchanges.

Unfortunately for you there is more than a kernel of truth there. And the truth is Republicans are relishing the fact their knuckle dragging has been successful in Republican led states. The facts are Obama did screw-up the website and rollout of the Affordable Care Act (i.e. Obamacare) in Republican states. The bad news for Republicans is that it is all fixable. The bad news for Republicans is that Obamcare will provide access to affordable and complete healthcare for millions of Americans. The unpleasant fact for Republicans is Obamacare has ended healthcare rationing based on wealth in The United States. The unfortunate fact for Republicans is that health insurers can no longer refuse to pay healthcare claims and deny people healthcare insurance when they become ill because of Obamacare.

These problems are likely to continue and even increase as Obamacare comes more fully into effect. Many of those who get their insurance thru their employer and think that their insurance plans are safe, are in for a rude awakening in 2014.

You guys keep telling yourselves that and keep hoping for adversity. You see how far that got you, telling yourselves “Romney is going to win” last year. The fact is with healthcare costs growing at multiples of income more and more employers have been reducing healthcare coverage for their employees for decades now. I worked for a Fortune 500 company who terminated its health insurance plans for retirees some 15 years because of increasing healthcare costs. When I began working for that company in 1984, all employee health insurance costs were covered by the company, including retiree healthcare. And since then, the percentage of employee healthcare costs paid for by the employer have done nothing but shrink with employees picking up more and more of the healthcare expenses.

Americans have been experiencing the rude awakening of spiraling healthcare costs for decades now. Americans have been experiencing employers terminating their employee healthcare plans for decades now. That is not a problem with Obamacare, that is a problem with the US healthcare system…one that Obamacare is designed to fix.

 

[Michael]

The problem with the free market taking on healthcare is that the best care goes to those most able to afford it.
The rest are left with the inexperienced, and those who couldn't make it.
The ideal, surely, is to have very good healthcare for the whole population.
The best surgeons should be taking on the most difficult cases, not the richest patients.

The free market ensures that the best healthcare is accessed by most people. But, it doesn't just spring out of the void and into existence. It requires an educated society that understands the most efficient and fair means to deliver the highly quality goods and services at the lowest price is a free-market, one that used sound money. This must be a society that doesn't think they're going to rape their way to prosperity and happiness. One that doesn't post-hoc justify violence because someone, once, somewhere in the middle of nowhere circa 1800s Americana, once sold some snake-oil to a dumb-arse whose lineage can be found rotting on a couch eating Macker's that was stuck in a fat-fold sitting in front of Jerry Springer re-runs they taped on a single VHS and like to watch over and over because it's smart-TV and they couldn't be bothered changing the magic box talky-pictures.

In a free market profit signals to everyone else that this is a service people actually want. AND people WILL provide this service. There are tens of thousands of highly motivated bright students who just, through dumb-luck, don't make the cut and end up not working in the medical profession - but waiting tables, or as a receptionist, or etc... In a free market these people will compete IN the market and thus more of the desired service will be provided. As competition ensues profit goes down while quality goes up. The profit that was saved forms the capital for new investment and innovation. Without profit, then it's the best demagogue that makes the case for spending capital. Without sound money - there is no capital. Soon, even the infrastructure itself decays and rots away until there's nothing left.

 

[pjdude1219]

Here's something Obama has accomplished with his healthcare plan, he's convinced a majority of Americans that the government should not attempt to guarantee universal coverage:

PS. It turns out that the woman cited by the president as an Obamacare success story can't afford the insurance available on the exchange and will instead be forced to pay the fine and go without insurance coverage. She was one of many people in Washington State to have been given incorrect information regarding what their subsidy would be:

yeah and the right wing lies had nothing to do with it. ACA had nothing to do with the drop. dishonest people like you did. after this blows over it will go right back to its usual level of support just like it did everytime elitist like your self have lied about it in the past.

 

[Michael]

Free Market is a license to steal sold to the highest bidder, greed always corrupts the system(but we need some of it), socialism always damps the system(but we need some of that, too). Anarchy is not even in the mix, it never works anywhere.

This is nonsensical. You can barely string together two terms without using some sort of analogy.

- The free market is not a 'license to steal' it's a term used to refer to the combined voluntary exchanges undertaken as an agreement between two or more people.
- You state no rational for why we 'need some greed'. This is what you do - make a statement without any evidence or any rational. Is a person who buys a large tub of ice cream all to themselves (we'll say to celebrate a job well done) - are they being 'greedy'? How about watching a movie *gasp* twice. Is that 'being greedy'?
- You state "socialism always damps the system". Again, you're incorrectly using an analogy. Socialism has many different meanings, some that are perfectly compatible with free-markets. It doesn't 'damp' anything in this context as we have to refer it to ANOTHER analogy. So, in two breaths you build analogy on top of analogy.
- Anarchy is not even in the mix, it never works anywhere; you're using anarchy incorrectly and you again provide no rational argument on why it 'never works anywhere'. Given you continue to use the word incorrectly, I doubt you can explain your rational - if you even have one.

Define the terms 'free market', system, greed, socialism, and anarchy and then attempt to rewrite this sentence WITHOUT analogy - I bet you can't.

In short, you seem to have difficulty thinking outside of analogy, you also don't seem to define any terms anywhere, you make illogical fallacies repeatedly and you default to statements that support your preconceived notions of what you want to be, not necessarily what is - this results in meaningless gibberish and is classical of most people who watch TV. I'd suggest not doing that so much.

 

[Michael]

Here's something Obama has accomplished with his healthcare plan, he's convinced a majority of Americans that the government should not attempt to guarantee universal coverage:

This is pretty interesting. It reminds me of Public Schooling. I bet if Public Schooling had never happened, and Government came along in 2013 and puked up the crap that is Public Schooling - there'd be total disgust. The only reason people accept such low quality, is because they were, as children, stuffed into and normalized to piss-poor education and come to think of this crap education is good education. I bet adults forced to attend Public Schooling (at say age 30+) for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week - they'd go insane. No one wold ever accept such poor education.

IMO this IS ObamaCare.
Americans finally getting up-close and face-to-face with their 'cherished' Public Service / Political Masters. ....and many don't like what they see.


It's a classic case of Government believing it's own bullshit. These "Public Servants" actually think they can do better than the free-market. It's really good this came along right at the same time as when we lost two wars and the federal reserve destroyed our economy - now is a wonderful time to see Government's ineptitude full front and center. The young are learning a great lesson today - let's hope they carry this lesson into their adult lives and demand Government get back into it's Box. Because the generation that never 'trusted anyone over 30' certainly changed it's tune when the freebie goodies where given out at their grandchildren's expense.

 

[joepistole]

This is pretty interesting. It reminds me of Public Schooling. I bet if Public Schooling had never happened, and Government came along in 2013 and puked up the crap that is Public Schooling - there'd be total disgust. The only reason people accept such low quality, is because they were, as children, stuffed into and normalized to piss-poor education and come to think of this crap education is good education. I bet adults forced to attend Public Schooling (at say age 30+) for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week - they'd go insane. No one wold ever accept such poor education.

IMO this IS ObamaCare.
Americans finally getting up-close and face-to-face with their 'cherished' Public Service / Political Masters. ....and many don't like what they see.

It's a classic case of Government believing it's own bullshit. These "Public Servants" actually think they can do better than the free-market. It's really good this came along right at the same time as when we lost two wars and the federal reserve destroyed our economy - now is a wonderful time to see Government's ineptitude full front and center. The young are learning a great lesson today - let's hope they carry this lesson into their adult lives and demand Government get back into it's Box. Because the generation that never 'trusted anyone over 30' certainly changed it's tune when the freebie goodies where given out at their grandchildren's expense.

No it is another classic case of you mindlessly repeating libertarian dogma.

 

[Michael]

Explain to me how Healthcare and Profits are 'mutually exclusive'. Saying something isn't the same as making a logical argument. How about food? Is food and profits 'mutually exclusive'? How about education? Is education and profits 'mutually exclusive'? How about medical devices? How about drugs? How about housing?
As a humanist I am inclined to say yes to all those examples.

As a humanist I am inclined to say yes to all those examples.

I find this interesting. So, here we are, in the USA and we have a number of Americans who think Profit is bad. Wow. I don't blame them - it's what happens when one moves from money to fiat currency. Slowly the poisoned immoral currency (half of every trade) leaks into society and destroys it from the inside out.

I bet there's plenty of Write4U's out there that'd love to tax the "Progressive" Joe's out there of 90% of their property - you know, for the good of the nation. You did sign your social contract didn't you Joe? The fine print clearly states that just at the time of your retiring, property taxes will be raised by 90% on all of your assets and savings to repay your grandchildren from the prosperity your generation has stolen from "The People". Doesn't that sound good Joe?

The State Loves you Joe.

 

[joepistole]

I find this interesting. So, here we are, in the USA and we have a number of Americans who think Profit is bad. Wow. I don't blame them - it's what happens when one moves from money to fiat currency. Slowly the poisoned immoral currency (half of every trade) leaks into society and destroys it from the inside out.

So a few left wing whackos think profits are bad, unlike their right wing counterparts they are an insignificant minority and they don’t have an entertainment industry promulgating their dogma 24 hours a day as you do. And it has nothing to do with fiat currencies. Socialism and Communism predate fiat currencies.

I bet there's plenty of Write4U's out there that'd love to tax the "Progressive" Joe's out there of 90% of their property - you know, for the good of the nation. You did sign your social contract didn't you Joe? The fine print clearly states that just at the time of your retiring, property taxes will be raised by 90% on all of your assets and savings to repay your grandchildren from the prosperity your generation has stolen from "The People". Doesn't that sound good Joe?

LOL, back to that nonsense, repeating falsehoods may make you feel better but it doesn’t make them any less false.

The State Loves you Joe.

They should, I pay them enough in taxes every year.

 

[Michael]

So a few left wing whacko think profits are bad,

Ummmm.... actually MOST people now think profits are bad. The Write4U's are now the majority. My only point is I'll have a good laugh when they get together and vote themselves your property for the 'Good of the Nation'. See, it's not stealing if you take a vote. Isn't that what you say Joe? A good boot on the neck is all part of the "social contract" you signed when you were born an "Americana" in the Land of the Free.... (LOF [laughing on the floor])

See: ObamaCare

To imagine the goal of most Americans 100 years ago was to own their own business. Not any longer. That's the dream of the Chinese. Most Americans wouldn't have the literary skills required to read, understand and abide by the miles of regulations - and those that can, don't have the stamina to. That just leaves Land Lording. Rent to the Poor and then Flip em overpriced houses. Yup, "Land of the Free". I give it another 5 years and many "Free" Americans will wonder why their LandLords speak Mandarin and live in China.

I wonder if we can get a brand on the rump of the Tax Cattle that says Property of the Federal Reserve? Or Property of China? Given the size of the rump on most Americana Tax Cattle, my guess is there's room enough for both.


As for printing press fiat currency and it's role in perverting the nature of society - that's exactly what it's doing. But hey, with fiat currency the State can waste money buying $13 billion dollar aircraft carriers that would make the "Gilded-age Mansions" look piss-poor in comparison - I'm sure the "Robber Barrons" would blush to see such extravagant wastefulness of resources at a time when most of society can't even afford basic healthcare or make rent to the LandLords who got in on the house flipping early. Yes, thank the Gods we have "Government" looking out for "our" best interests (when it's not illegally spying on us in it's $52 BILLION dollar spy complexes).

Yes, thank the Gods for The State - how would we ever wipe our arses without it. I'm just waiting for all those Social Progressives to get the bright idea of a 95% tax on every "Americana's" assets over the average savings account balance (in the USSA this was $5,923 in 2011).

 

[Michael]

LibertyBlitzkrieg
Meet Jessica Sanford. Upon the rollout of Obamacare she was 1 of maybe 5 people in the entire nation who was able to access the website and actually sign up through one of the state exchanges. In her case, it was the Washington exchange. She was so thrilled about her purchase that she wrote a letter to President Barrack Obama expressing her undying gratitude. Since her letter was quite possibly the only positive letter the Administration received, Barry O proudly read it aloud during his Obamacare speech on October 21st. The only problem is that a few days later she was repriced out of Obamacare. So she’s now uninsured again…

From CNN:

[video=youtube;BRwS4KoF62g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRwS4KoF62g[/video]