Stupidity of American Voters...

[Bocefish]

What we have with obamacare is not better. We only needed 2 laws passed not an entire reform.

1. No denying insurance to people with pre existing conditions.

2. Price limit for what insurance can charge people.

3. Allow interstate competition...

but the government can never do anything simply without completely fucking it up on a bureaucratic behemoth scale.

 

[Yarrow]

In my experience with health insurance it IS better than what we had before.

I could not be insured with my preexisting conditions (that I was born with) without paying heaps more for 'high risk insurance' through whatever State I was in at the time- and I did. It sucked. It was much worse insurance than many of the plans offered on the exchange. I had 5 choices of coverage all through one company- and all choices except one were terrible. My deductible was still very very high. I paid an average of 1/4 to 1/3rd of my income every year to have insurance that I hardly used, but because of my health conditions I need to have just in case. When you are single, self employed, and in your 20's that is a LOT of money- it is a lot of money for anyone.

There are many problems with setting a price limit or cap on what insurance can charge- one is the overheard of each insurance company, then the price for doctors and hospitals, the ages of those insured, and another is predicting how many people will need care every year. It would be awesome if there could be a price limit, but the only way to really achieve that is with a single payer system- and even with a price ceiling we will still have problems with shortages to care. My Canadian friends complain about this sometimes, but they still like their care much better than they like what we have in the States.

A lot of the health insurance plans out there were poor- ones offered through jobs, ones you could purchase yourself, and most certainly those offered to those with pre-existing conditions. A reform helps level the playing field a little bit, although it is far from perfect. You have to start somewhere.

 

[Bocefish]

 

[weirdbr]

There are many problems with setting a price limit or cap on what insurance can charge- one is the overheard of each insurance company, then the price for doctors and hospitals, the ages of those insured, and another is predicting how many people will need care every year. It would be awesome if there could be a price limit, but the only way to really achieve that is with a single payer system- and even with a price ceiling we will still have problems with shortages to care. My Canadian friends complain about this sometimes, but they still like their care much better than they like what we have in the States.

A system with multiple insurers and a cap on the price of basic coverage is possible and works - that's what we have in Switzerland ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Switzerland , some more details in http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapotheca ... re-system/ . Personally I recommend the german version of the wikipedia article, even if read through google translate ) .

The problem though is that it requires a more nuanced approach to solving the problem than the binary argument that Republicans and Democrats use (market vs government regulation).. And to get that to happen in the US is unlikely from what I've seen as an outsider.

 

[Yarrow]

Thanks Weirdbr! I will read that when I get off cam tonight.

That is the problem with the US Government- we are constantly at a full on tug of war between the two parties. I come from a very red state, live in a red state currently, and was raised by Republicans. My dad worked in the government for many years and was exacerbated by how little anyone could get done with all the power plays by both Republicans and Democrats. Because I can see the logic in both parties at times, and neither party at others, I have grown not subscribe to either.

Boce- I still am not as upset as you seem me to want to be about Mr. Gruber or Obama. This is how bills pass all the time and I am sure you are well aware of this. It took both parties to pass this bill into law and lots of added side bar rules and regulations from both Republicans and Democrats. If people thought they were going to get healthcare reform without having to pay for it, then they might want to look around to see where their tax money goes.

 

[Bocefish]

Boce- I still am not as upset as you seem me to want to be about Mr. Gruber or Obama. This is how bills pass all the time and I am sure you are well aware of this. It took both parties to pass this bill into law and lots of added side bar rules and regulations from both Republicans and Democrats.

It took both parties to pass Obamacare? I don't recall a single Republican in favor of it. The Senate at that time had 60 Democrats, just enough to pass Obamacare. And it doesn't matter to me if you're upset about Gruber, or not, lol. We all have differing opinions... I posted the Daily Show segment because I thought it was funny.

 

[Shaun__]

What we have with obamacare is not better. We only needed 2 laws passed not an entire reform.

1. No denying insurance to people with pre existing conditions.

2. Price limit for what insurance can charge people.

3. Allow interstate competition...

but the government can never do anything simply without completely fucking it up on a bureaucratic behemoth scale.

You two would have driven the entire insurance industry out of business since people would only bother to get insurance after an accident or when they are sick. There is a reason even conservatives, before Obama took office, thought the individual mandate was the only way to salvage the insurance industry.

The problem is that the mandate should have been a tax to fund a single payer system. It just does not go far enough.

 

[JerryBoBerry]

Boce- I still am not as upset as you seem me to want to be about Mr. Gruber or Obama. This is how bills pass all the time and I am sure you are well aware of this. It took both parties to pass this bill into law and lots of added side bar rules and regulations from both Republicans and Democrats.

It took both parties to pass Obamacare? I don't recall a single Republican in favor of it. The Senate at that time had 60 Democrats, just enough to pass Obamacare. And it doesn't matter to me if you're upset about Gruber, or not, lol. We all have differing opinions... I posted the Daily Show segment because I thought it was funny.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act yes, I'm on my tablet so you get a mobile link.

The House passed the Senate bill with a 219–212 vote on March 21, 2010, with 34 Democrats and all 178 Republicans voting against it.

 

[Yarrow]

Please do not take my words out of context. I didn't mean to say they voted for it in the end- I mean to say you know they forced a ton of changes to it again and again and again in an effort to delay or it mame it from what it was originally intended to be. Just because a bill doesn't get voted on in the end by a certain party doesn't mean people don't try to get things added to it or changed because they still know it will pass. It happens all the time.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

Please do not take my words out of context. I didn't mean to say they voted for it in the end- I mean to say you know they forced a ton of changes to it again and again and again in an effort to delay or it mame it from what it was originally intended to be. Just because a bill doesn't get voted on in the end by a certain party doesn't mean people don't try to get things added to it or changed because they still know it will pass. It happens all the time.

I really don't want to dragged into debating ACA again on the Net (I figured 7 or 8 time is plenty), but this is the most partisan piece of major legislation I have seen in my lifetime. Almost no Republican amendments were voted on in either the House or the Senate much less adopted. While it is true that certain concept of ObamaCare were based on reforms proposed by Republican, the devil is in the details and it was rammed through on a strictly partisan basis. I hope the Republican don't do the same thing in upcoming sessions (they really can't because of Obama's veto).

 

[Yarrow]

I can see what you are saying HiGirls, for sure. It probably is the most polarizing bill I have seen in my lifetime, but then again I am not that old.

I am not one to debate politics at all on the internet- I just do that with my dad. This is literally the only time I have ever posted about politics online, and as the daughter of someone who worked for many years getting bills passed in DC, I know both parties hands had a part in this. For each party to point the finger at the other or stick their heads in the sand is silly. Everyones hands are dirty. I just think the ACA could have been a lot better, but many people just can't seem to see past party lines. I don't think I will ever fully understand why people draw such firm us vs. them lines in the sand.

My parents, the staunch Republicans that they are, are relieved the bill passed. Maybe that is not common, I don't know. They have seen me struggle for years with the other health care system we had. Since I have handled my own health care, I know what to look for in a plan and how to get my ducks in a row before I sign the dotted line. A lot of people have either never been able to do that or had a job do a lot of that for them. So now with all the plans on the ACA, they are either confused or angry at how much things cost. Yeah it sucks that insurance costs so much, but hopefully future bills can address that more. I think a lot of the problem lies in people not being very educated about what the ACA can do for them- instead they focus on what it can't do or that Obama made it. It can do a lot if you can budget the money and stay informed. It has a lot of downfalls too, I am well aware. Plus it can be expensive for the young- who are the ones who really need to sign up. Hopefully the glaring holes and issues can be fixed slowly without an all out cock fight in Congress. This seems like wishful thinking, but one can hope.

I still find it sad that people are focusing on the Gruber 'Stupid American' spectacle instead of educating themselves about the bill and how they can use it to their best interests.

I guess that's all I can say.

 

[Nordling]

I find the phrase "rammed through" very strange in the context of ACA. Two years of debate on a bill that's been overdue since Teddy Roosevelt first attempted it is NOT by any definitions "rammed through."

"Partisan?" How is it any more partisan than any bill other than naming a new post office or kindred. This is especially silly when the core of the bill was based on a concept created by the far, right-wing Heritage Foundation, and basically already in place in Massachusetts (after being signed by a Republican governor).

 

[Bocefish]

I find the phrase "rammed through" very strange in the context of ACA. Two years of debate on a bill that's been overdue since Teddy Roosevelt first attempted it is NOT by any definitions "rammed through."

"Partisan?" How is it any more partisan than any bill other than naming a new post office or kindred. This is especially silly when the core of the bill was based on a concept created by the far, right-wing Heritage Foundation, and basically already in place in Massachusetts (after being signed by a Republican governor).

:lol: You probably still think Obamacare is not a tax!


Romneycare:
-Whole bill was 70 pages
-Romney vetoed significant sections of the bill including the employer penalty for not providing health insurance
-Romney favored an “opt out” provision from the mandate
-No federal gov. insurance option
-Intended as a market driven solution to healthcare

Obamacare:
-Whole bill was 2,074 pages
-Very broad regulation of the insurance industry including an employer penalty for not providing health insurance and no "opt out" provision
-Leaves open the option of creating single-payer gov. insurance in the future
-Intended as a step toward gov. run insurance

Romneycare costs:
-No new taxes!
-Romney balanced the state’s budget first, then passed healthcare law
-No cuts to Medicare benefits
-Modest cost to state (only added 1% to state budget)

Obamacare costs:
-Increased taxes by $500 billion
-Despite massive federal gov. debt, Obama still passed Obamacare
-Cuts Medicare by $500 billion
-Overall costs unknown!

Romneycare:
-Very strong bipartisan support
-Strong special interest support
-Very popular among the public in Massachusetts
-Strong consensus of approval was built in the state to support the law
-Consensus was built to support an individual mandate

Obamacare:
-Absolutely no bipartisan support
-Very controversial and divided special interest groups
-Unpopular in nation overall
-No consensus was built to support a mandate

Romneycare
-A state solution to a state problem
-Through collaboration and discussion, Massachusetts created a consensus among stake holders to support the new law

Obamacare:
-Federal gov. “one-size-fits-all” plan
-Does Not take into account that each state is unique in important ways such as:
1)Vastly different debt levels between states (some states can’t afford new spending on health care)
2)Some states have three times the percentage of uninsured citizens (Much greater costs will be imposed on states with a larger percentage of uninsured citizens)
3)Conservative states reject implementation of federal gov. plan.

http://mittromneyandhealthcare.blogspot ... acare.html

Obamacare condensed version:

1. In order to insure the uninsured, we first have to uninsure the insured.

2. Next, we require the newly uninsured to be re-insured.

3. To re-insure the newly uninsured, they are required to pay extra charges to be re-insured.

4. The extra charges are required so that the original insured, who became uninsured, and then became re-insured, can pay enough extra so that the original uninsured can be insured, which will be free of charge to them.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is called "redistribution of wealth"... or, by its more common name, SOCIALISM.

 

[Bocefish]

I still find it sad that people are focusing on the Gruber 'Stupid American' spectacle instead of educating themselves about the bill and how they can use it to their best interests.

Exposing the the lies from the Obama administration doesn't stop anyone from educating themselves about the bill. In fact, it's quite the opposite. Most people get a little irate when they're intentionally lied to and manipulated for someone else's agenda. Politicians keep forgetting they work for the people, not the other way around.

Gruber has since been fired twice in the past two days from his contracting gigs in Vermont and North Carolina. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy. :lol:

 

[Nordling]

You should probably cite your assertions.

ObamaCare Medicare reform improves and expands Medicare for seniors. The ObamaCare Medicare cuts are estimated at $716 billion. Those cuts are reinvested into Medicare and ObamaCare to improve care for seniors and close the Medicare Part D “donut hole” among other things.

http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-medicare/

 

[Bocefish]

You should probably cite your assertions.

ObamaCare Medicare reform improves and expands Medicare for seniors. The ObamaCare Medicare cuts are estimated at $716 billion. Those cuts are reinvested into Medicare and ObamaCare to improve care for seniors and close the Medicare Part D “donut hole” among other things.

http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-medicare/

The sooner the president recognizes that Obamacare threatens to be a miserable failure when it comes to corralling Medicare spending, the sooner we can get on with the business of fundamentally overhauling Medicare so that it actually looks like a 21st century health plan and is sustainable for generations to come. Every year we kick the can down the road simply increases the magnitude of the unconscionable burden this president already has loaded onto the shoulders of our children and grandchildren. Enough is enough.

U.S. Treasury to President Obama: Medicare's Current Policy 'Is Unsustainable'/

 

[Nordling]

You should probably cite your assertions.

ObamaCare Medicare reform improves and expands Medicare for seniors. The ObamaCare Medicare cuts are estimated at $716 billion. Those cuts are reinvested into Medicare and ObamaCare to improve care for seniors and close the Medicare Part D “donut hole” among other things.

http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-medicare/

The sooner the president recognizes that Obamacare threatens to be a miserable failure when it comes to corralling Medicare spending, the sooner we can get on with the business of fundamentally overhauling Medicare so that it actually looks like a 21st century health plan and is sustainable for generations to come. Every year we kick the can down the road simply increases the magnitude of the unconscionable burden this president already has loaded onto the shoulders of our children and grandchildren. Enough is enough.

U.S. Treasury to President Obama: Medicare's Current Policy 'Is Unsustainable'/

And I'm supposed to believe the assertions of a right-wing contributor to a right-wing rag why?

Maybe if we quit sending kids over to Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere and spend that money on health care at home this wouldn't even be an issue.

Anyway, sorry I got into this, my friend. We could go back and forth on this for weeks...and honestly, I'd rather look at pretty women.

 

[Bocefish]

You should probably cite your assertions.

ObamaCare Medicare reform improves and expands Medicare for seniors. The ObamaCare Medicare cuts are estimated at $716 billion. Those cuts are reinvested into Medicare and ObamaCare to improve care for seniors and close the Medicare Part D “donut hole” among other things.

http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-medicare/

The sooner the president recognizes that Obamacare threatens to be a miserable failure when it comes to corralling Medicare spending, the sooner we can get on with the business of fundamentally overhauling Medicare so that it actually looks like a 21st century health plan and is sustainable for generations to come. Every year we kick the can down the road simply increases the magnitude of the unconscionable burden this president already has loaded onto the shoulders of our children and grandchildren. Enough is enough.

U.S. Treasury to President Obama: Medicare's Current Policy 'Is Unsustainable'/

And I'm supposed to believe the assertions of a right-wing contributor to a right-wing rag why?

If you read it, it's backed up by the U.S. Treasury PDF (http://www.fms.treas.gov/fr/12frusg/12frusg.pdf) which is just slightly more legitimate and believable than claims from the liar of the year's website promising you can keep your doctor and that Obamamacare is NOT a tax! :lol:

I'm done too, said my peace... now back to more important things. :mrgreen: