Did Obama And The White House Know? [Pic+]

Submitted by: 5cats 3 years ago

NBC Investigations asks if they knew millions would lose their current healthcare plan, and lied about it.
There are 102 comments:
Male 1,154
@Oldollie, I would say the same to you.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
kree, your problem is that you believe a whole lot of crap that just isn`t true.
0
Reply
Male 1,154
Ok I`ve read this report front to back, and I didn`t see anything about a 14% cost increase, or a 7450 cost increase. Can you give a page number?
0
Reply
Male 1,154
r 5 people. I will agree that premiums went up this year through the workplace, and I will believe that they went up for most employees, however the increase in premiums also correlate to an increase in coverage. At my job there were 2 options available, for 22 or 55 a paycheck. Now there are three options. 25 45 and 65. the 25 option is slightly better than the 22 was, the 45 was slightly worse than the 55, and the 65 slightly better. So to keep the same coverage I would need to step up and either pay 10% more or 20% more depending on my choice. However I could be saving 20% by taking a slightly cheaper option that meets my needs. I`m purchasing the best plan available to me, but not everyone needs to make that choice, and if for whatever reason I find myself out of work, I know I can find an equally valued plan on the marketplace. Did I luck out? yes, but I don`t think anyone got screwed, and I have yet to hear a 300% increase story that wasn`t a half truth or a misunderstanding.
0
Reply
Male 1,154
@rich

I will adress your last post first, as it will take some time to read through your first link. Thank you for providing it by the way, at first glance it is informative and an interesting read. As for the second link, the blog you have posted is 2 years old, and as far as I can tell, with a quick glance, inaccurate. Again it will take some time reading the KFF reports before I can accurately discuss that issue.

One of the benefits of the ACA is that insurance providers may no longer charge higher premiums for people with preexisting conditions, they also may not drop coverage for the same. Because of this the segment of the population that most needs healthcare is able to receive it at a affordable rate. When i owned my own company I was paying insurance for five employees, unfortunately I was not as good at running a business as I am at arguing on the internet and it went under. Interestingly, keeping the same coverage for myself would have cost as much as I ha
0
Reply
Male 3,947
...u were "insured by my workplace."

The Kaiser Family Foundation and the American Hospital Association`s Health Research and Educational Trust found that in their annual Employer Health Benefits Survey Health Insurance Premiums Jumped 8-9% in 2011, a year after Obamacare went into effect. This is an increase from the regular 3-5% recorded in 2010 before the bill took effect.

link

These studies were all done by well respected nonpartisan organisations, I can`t see how they`d all have have a change of character, simultaneously start lying at the same time, and also coming to the exact same figures. So if you are one of the few seeing savings, I would think there might be more to the story or you are simply the exception to the case not the majority.
0
Reply
Male 3,947
Page 15 says that because additional 21 million culminating in 34 million, they will all have a very tough time finding a doctor who will treat them, only enhanced when doctors begin leaving the market. On page 8 of the report it recognises that it creates funding issues meaning hospitals currently serving Medicare patients might be forced to stop doing so. Thus making it much more difficult for seniors to get health care.

These projections are nonpartisan, created by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and accepted by the CBO as the impact Obamacare will have on the vast majority of Americans.


This is the centers for medcare and Mecicaid report


Although the majority of the increases will be in the individual market, I see you mentioned that yo
0
Reply
Male 3,947
@kree:
As I said before, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has published annual projections of national health care spending showing that in 2014, the net cost of health insurance will increase by nearly 14 percent under Obamacare, compared to 3.5 percent without the law. Insurance premiums will rise at a 9.4 percent rate, versus the 5 percent without Obamacare. Thats an 88 percent difference. Federal health care spending will increase by $621,000,000,000 over the next 10 years and the average family of 4 will see their rates increase $7450. In addition people on welfare will increase 21 million meaning that 3/5 of the people who gain health insurance will receive it through welfare.
0
Reply
Male 1,154
30-300% is bullpoo. That is only valid if they stick with an off market private policy. On the exchange they will find a plan of equal or greater quality for an equal or lower price. For example the guy in the debunking debunking story who couldn`t find a plan for less than 900 a month. You put his wife`s info into the exchange, assume the worst case possibilities, ie a smoker, not part of a multi person plan, makes too much to get subsidies, etc, and you will find a half dozen plans for under 500.

@5cats, the difference between subsidies and tax cuts is that tax cuts can lower tax to zero, and subsidies can lower tax to negative. For the specifics you refer to, the difference is that these subsidies mostly effect the bottom 60% of earners, while the tax cuts mostly effected the top 13% of earners.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]But my point stands, the ACA makes health insurance affordable.[/quote]
No, your point doesn`t stand. The VAST majority of people trying to buy insurance through the exchanges are signing up for Medicaid, which is a 100% drain on taxpayers. The ones being subsidized are also a drain on taxpayers to a greater or lesser extent. The rest are people whose policies have been cancelled due to Obamacare regulations are seeing their rates going up by 30-300%.

Obamacare is a total unmitigated disaster. Our only hope is that these f***tards are so incompetent that the program falls apart before it ends up destroying our entire economy. That`s why I`m rooting for Sebelius to stay.
0
Reply
Male 1,154
@OldOllie, actually I`m insured through my workplace, so even if I purchased insurance through the exchange I wouldn`t be eligible for subsidies. But my point stands, the ACA makes health insurance affordable. And while it is difficult to get exact details about things like income, I`ve yet to toss anyone`s information into the exchange without finding an affordable price.
0
Reply
Male 2,424
"did they know?"

Does the bear poo in the woods?
0
Reply
Male 15,832
@kree [quote]Thanks Obama![/quote]
Don`t thank Obama. Thank all of us poor bastards out here working our asses off the pay the taxes that are supporting your worthless ass.

If you`re taking out more than you`re putting in, you`re a f***ing parasite.
0
Reply
Male 1,154
The last time I tried for private insurance, I could not find a plan for less than 1200 a month.

With the affordable care act, I`m finding great plans for less than 100 a month after subsidies. Thanks Obama!
0
Reply
Male 676
And idiots still think is the neatest thing since sliced bread.
0
Reply
Male 7,337
You are correct, OldOllie. I would say it`s a consensus (and EVERY liberal loves a onsensus....right?)

However, I`m sure that lauriloo or some other idiot will be along shortly to tell us how the fact that Obama is a `lying sack of dog $#!+.` and also an `incompetent f***tard` is actually GOOD for us, and he`s such a saint for being both those things for our own good.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
After reading all the posts, I`d have to say that the consensus is that Obama is a "lying sack of dog $#!+." However, that does not preclude the possibility that he is also an "incompetent f***tard." The two are not mutually exclusive.
0
Reply
Male 3,947
...spending by $621,000,000,000 over the next 10 years.)

Medicare`s Actuary Report 2013

Thats an increase of $7450 for a family of four!!!


0
Reply
Male 3,947
Obamacare false promises:

1. "If you like your health care plan, you`ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what."---False

2. This law will lower your premiums!----false
(and immediately corrected by other Democrats like Dick Durbin saying that if you say it will lower premiums it "isn`t telling the truth!")

3. Obamacare budget is not double counting --False
(admitted to by Sibelius and Richard S. Foster)

4. "If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period"---false

5. Obamacare will lower Health Care spending--false
(Doug Holtz-Eakin of the CBO, John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis, Jim Capretta of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, Democrats like Jackie Speier, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and several independent studies have all found that ObamaCare will actually increase healthcare spen
0
Reply
Male 3,947
@Musuko42: Are you trying to equate guns with repealing bad laws? Firstly, Obamacare isn`t a 2nd amendment right written in by the founders and secondly you can`t make Obamacare in your house with a pipe, a rubber band, a nail, and a bullet.
0
Reply
Male 36,360
Just in time to prove my point:
Senate Democrats Rejected Repub Bill In 2010! The Repubs said "this `Grandfather rule` in the ACA will lead to cancellations." The Dems said HECK YES it will, that`s why it`s there!

Following this @lauriloo? The REPUBS TRIED to fix broken bits of ObamaCare in 2010, the DEMS SHOT IT DOWN knowing full well what would happen!

Then Obama, and all his flunkies, continued to lie KNOWING it was a lie!

@Viking864: The subsidies come from the "magical money fairies" :-)!! The same place "free" Obama Phones came from!! It`s FREE!!!!
lolz! Of course you`re correct: it`s TAXES!

Answer me this IAB Liberals: HOW is ObamaCare`s subsidies different from "Bush`s Tax Cuts"? Both CUT REVENUE, cor
0
Reply
Male 579
IMHO, of course he knew and of course he is lying. It`s quite obvious to me they are trying to force European style socialism down our throats and will stop at nothing to get there. They are paving the way to push single-payer. It`s about the only transparent thing about this administration.
0
Reply
Male 14,330
[quote]Your point doesn`t make sense to me. What European has repeatedly supported the NRA in the US on here?[/quote]

Wow just wow!

[quote]What other person, other than 5Cats, has repeatedly slammed another country`s government, Obama in particular? No other person on here so rabidly hates another country`s gov.[/quote]

ROFL!!! You just described every other European on here!
0
Reply
Male 5,620
5Cats - It isn`t about how much or how long it is an issue. It simply boils down to people don`t want to read about it more than once - especially if one of the articles you post is sub-par.

It just makes more sense to post one really good article, as opposed to suggesting several that aren`t so good.

At least that is what I am seeing, perhaps that is part of the reason why people dislike your posts so much.
0
Reply
Male 7,337
@Musuko42

The only part of that rambling statement that I agree with is the fact that the President is a tool. (but not usefull one)
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@Cajun247

"A parable in which people come together without someone so much as waving bayonets around at everyone else!"

The government isn`t forcing you to do anything: you and peers are the ones forcing you to do things, via the tool of the government that you and they elected into power.

If you don`t like what the tool is used for, criticise the ones wielding it, not the tool itself.

Funny how that sounds like a gun control argument, isn`t it? I wonder if that can be expanded: sometimes you just have to take tools away from people who have shown they aren`t responsible enough to use them correctly. Perhaps the same is true of the American public and their politicans, considering the recent shambles. :)
0
Reply
Male 1,444
Some of you do realize where the "subsidies" come from right? In other words you are paying for health coverage for yourself and or others but at that point it`s only called income taxes and not health insurance cost.
0
Reply
Male 1,293
It is hilarious seeing socialists trying to justify Obama`s straight lie.

Of course he lies a lot, but most of the time it is hard to prove that he lied so they can twist and turn to avoid admitting he did. Now there is a lie that he had to know was a lie (the plain language of the ACA meant it must be) and they are still instinctively twisting and turning, and are shown up as wilfully blind.

Pathetic.
0
Reply
Male 36,360
[quote]It`s not. It`s a BETTER plan...[/quote]
#1: She`s being FORCED to get a `new plan`. Yes?
#2: Those prices are WITH subsidies: yes!
#3: If her income changes? (and YOUR article says it fluctuates yearly) The IRS can "claw back" the $2,400 "reductions" > and then she`s paying about $3,000 MORE PER YEAR!
#4 Your "fact checker" ASSUMED she`d qualify for subsidies... ASSUMED! Without those "magical Obama telephones..." her rate is nearly DOUBLED.

MY Blind Rage? :-) Doesn`t match your "wilful blindness" to the facts YOU PRESENTED!

AS FOR AUTO INSURANCE:
When the Gov`t TAXES YOU for NOT OWNING A CAR? Then there is SOME similarity. Otherwise? Strawman? False Flag? Idiocy? Pathological subject changing? Democrat Talking Point Syndrome?
0
Reply
Male 15,832
@lauriloo [quote]I dunno. When the gov decided there was a minimum amount of liability auto insurance or when they regulate the quality of our food, safety of goods we purchase and the quality of our environment?[/quote]
You should have stopped with "I dunno." None of that crap is in the constitution.
0
Reply
Male 7,337
@lauriloo

And you`ve STILL managed to dance around the topic of the thread.

Which of the following accurately describes Obama?
1) He didn`t know, in which case he`s an incompetent f***tard.
2) He did know, in which case he`s a lying sack of dog $#!+.

I realize you know that he`s a lying sack of 5hit, but you just can`t bring yourself to say it. (unless, of course, you REALLY are dumb enough to think otherwise)
0
Reply
Male 7,337
lauriloo-"So you admit to fabricating the notion that he made up numbers to support your viewpoint. thanks for admitting that."

No, I admit to having a better reading comprehension than you, in that he never stated he used her information. Technically, the way it`s worded he didn`t even claim to use her salary.

And, of course, you`re totally ignoring the fact that you have already been provided with a link that debunks your debunking story.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"Actually, his exact words were, "I did so while we talked." Hoping the gullible would believe it was a joint effort, but at not time did he say he used her information (besides her salary)."

So you admit to fabricating the notion that he made up numbers to support your viewpoint. thanks for admitting that.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
Sorry, "forced" was a strong word. You are always free to move to a country with the kind of societal structure that would make you happier. Since most first world countries have universal healthcare, guess you`ll have to move to a second or third world country. Enjoy!
0
Reply
Male 7,337
lauriloo-"he was working WITH the woman to check her available coverage"

Actually, his exact words were, "I did so while we talked." Hoping the gullible would believe it was a joint effort, but at not time did he say he used her information (besides her salary).

lauriloo-"certain people need to be forced to do the right thing."

See, that`s liberals for you. Always forcing their will, no matter how flawed, upon others. After all, they`re `enlightened`.
0
Reply
Male 3,947
"people need to be forced to do the right thing"

yes, Comrade!


0
Reply
Female 1,803
"-It`s still $480 more expensive AFTER subsidies."
A YEAR, not a huge amount more per month like she claimed and she`ll pay less in other places because the coverage is better. If she likes a high deductible she can pay less per month.

-She cannot keep her current doctor
Didn`t say that anywhere in the article. Don`t make things up.

-If her `old plan` was SO BAD? Why is the nearly identical plan offered by ObamaCare?"

It`s not. It`s a BETTER plan that offers everything she had and more at lower out of pocket maximums and lower deductible, or the same high deductible and a lower premium.

Sheesh. Does your blind rage keep you from reading?
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"I`m sure when the author was `checking` the prices for Ms. Bartiromo he made the `best possible` assumptions to get the lowest price (and doubtful that these assumptions were accurate), why, he may have even `fundged` the numbers a bit (after all, liberals are well known for that...see `Climategate`). "

If you had read the article accurately, he was working WITH the woman to check her available coverage, so no assumptions necessary. Don`t let real data get in your way, though.

The trouble with the modern day "stone soup" is that nowadays certain people need to be forced to do the right thing. Sad really.

0
Reply
Male 36,360
@DFWBrysco: 7% is over 21 MILLION people... and the actual number will be over 120 million once the "employer coverage" rules kick in next year.

So 21 Million people is "chump change" for you? NICE!

The point remains: CAN YOU KEEP your current coverage? Like Obama PROMISED, personally, publicly, over 24 times? (And many more times in `closed` speeches, and hundreds of times his `Team Obama` made the claim...)

For MILLIONS the answer is: NO!
Why?
>>The ACA FORCES Insurance Companies to CHANGE their policies!
>>Once changed? They NO LONGER QUALIFY for the "Grandfather clause" and are cancelled!
>>This is a FEATURE of the ACA! Not an `accident`, not `greedy companies`! It`s the LAW. Obama`s LAW!

The sweet Schadenfreude of watching you liberals spin spin SPIN!
0
Reply
Male 2,357
@lauriloo

[quote]you never fail to reduce everything to the absurd[/quote]
Ah, yes. Time has shown me that `absurd` is the language you speak.

[quote]What you see as entitlements I see as a safety net for people who don`t have the resources I have to get out of a bad situation.[/quote]
So, would you then say that people are - wait for it - entitled to those things that you consider part of the safety net? Absurd.

[quote]Corporate greed, gov blockading and constant warring is what is driving this country over the edge, not helping the poor.[/quote]
Please rank the following in order of least to most expensive in terms of government spending: interest, defense, social security, and medicare/Medicaid. Absurd.
0
Reply
Male 7,337
lauriloo-"Another Obamacare horror story debunked"

Sorry, that debunked nothing.

I`m sure when the author was `checking` the prices for Ms. Bartiromo he made the `best possible` assumptions to get the lowest price (and doubtful that these assumptions were accurate), why, he may have even `fundged` the numbers a bit (after all, liberals are well known for that...see `Climategate`).
I`d rather take the word of the person who has a vested interest in getting the coverage she wants, not the one with the vested interest in proving her wrong and, thus, propping up his Savior.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
[quote]Ever heard of the parable "Stone Soup"[/quote]

ROFL!!! A parable in which people come together without someone so much as waving bayonets around at everyone else! Guided by nothing more than curiosity and innovation. They saw the plight and helped out without taxes involved. Excellent example!
0
Reply
Male 3,947
"Corporate greed, gov blockading and constant warring is what is driving this country over the edge, not helping the poor."

No, debt is what driving this country over the edge. Those things you mentioned are constants of any government going back in time. Helping the poor is a noble goal, but doing it with the resources you have available is what makes it practical. To just promise anything when you don`t have the ability to cover it is not only irresponsible but more harmful than if you had said nothing at all.
0
Reply
Male 36,360
@Lauriloo:
Your "debunking" article has been: DeBunked!

-It`s still $480 more expensive AFTER subsidies.
-She cannot keep her current doctor
-If her `old plan` was SO BAD? Why is the nearly identical plan offered by ObamaCare?
0
Reply
Male 7,337
This thread started out as `Did Obama and the White House Know?`, when it`s obvious they did.

It`s now known without a doubt that this administration in geneeral, and the president in particular, has known all along and been lying about it the entire time.

Old Olllie put it succinctly when he correctly stated that there were only tow possibilities.
1) He didn`t know, in which case he`s an incompetent f***tard.
2) He did know, in which case he`s a lying sack of dog $#!+.

While I pointed out that anyone who denied that was the Perfect Obama Voter (i.e. dumber than 5hit).

Thank you lauriloo and DFWBrysco for demonstrating the truth of those statements.
0
Reply
Male 3,947
@lauriloo: First off I never accused you of not paying off your debts, you were the one who accused me of "have no idea what things cost" because of my "innocence of youth" as you put it. Infact I never accused you of anything other than being a hypocrite, which was backed up by what you already said in this post, and only after you began making assumption of me.

I could care less that you voluntarily threw yourself into debt and worked it off. Kudos, on doing what you`re supposed to.

entitlements, safety nets, whatever verbiage you prefer, they are what is bipartisanly agreed upon is causing the massive amount of debt this country has.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"Nothing could be more uncaring and cold than asking government to take from Peter to give to Paul. Not only did you NOT try understand Paul`s needs you ripped Peter off and did it in the name of making yourself feel better."

Ever heard of the parable "Stone Soup"? at least I think it`s parable.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
lol HumanAction, you never fail to reduce everything to the absurd. Easier than arguing your point, I guess.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
[quote] I see it as a cost to living in a society and not by myself on a deserted island because someday, that person needing help could be me or someone I love. I can see beyond my own selfish needs and wants.[/quote]

Nothing could be more uncaring and cold than asking government to take from Peter to give to Paul. Not only did you NOT try understand Paul`s needs you ripped Peter off and did it in the name of making yourself feel better.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
Female 1,803
"No I`m an honest person who pays my debts and refuses to pay for other people`s entitlements that are driving this country over the edge."

At one point in my life, I was laid off from work and trying to start a new career. I racked up over 40k in debt in the process and never declared bankruptcy to get out of it. Aside from a few weeks of unemployment I didn`t take any gov help, either. I`m debt-free now. So don`t talk to me about being responsible for my own debts. What you see as entitlements I see as a safety net for people who don`t have the resources I have to get out of a bad situation. I see it as a cost to living in a society and not by myself on a deserted island because someday, that person needing help could be me or someone I love. I can see beyond my own selfish needs and wants. Corporate greed, gov blockading and constant warring is what is driving this country over the edge, not helping the poor.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
[quote]Are you able to see beyond your selfish, myopic view of the world or are you a right-winger through and through?[/quote]

Spoken like a true condescending leftist. To think I ever aligned myself to this "philosophy".
0
Reply
Male 2,357
[quote]In other words: screw arguing, I`m just going to go straight to poisoning the well.[/quote]
IAB has never had a more poignant statement.

"selfish, myopic view of the world"
"right-winger through and through"
"Ahh, the innocence of youth."
"Yeah, he`s mental."
"Don`t try to understand crazy."

If you present an difficult argument, her default reaction tends to be one of the following:

1. "You`re younger than me so there!"
2. "You`re not a woman so you wouldn`t understand!"
3. "You stupid right-winger, Faux news loving, tea-baggin Bush-buddy!"

From experience, I`ve learned to interpret these statements as follows:

1. "Damn, that is a very good point."
2. "I`ve lost this argument."
3. "I am unwilling to engage in any form of mental exercise at this time."

Hope this clears up some of the
0
Reply
Male 3,947
@lauriloo: "how lucky you were that your family didn`t go bankrupt like so many other families do in a situation like yours or worse."

Yea your right we were lucky, we came very close but we were lucky. But thats what bankruptcy courts are there for and bankruptcy doesn`t always mean you don`t pay the debt owed. Even if we did go bankrupt we`d still pay back what we owe.

"are you a right-winger through and through"

No I`m an honest person who pays my debts and refuses to pay for other people`s entitlements that are driving this country over the edge.

"Too bad you can`t see that the ACA is an attempt to prevent the very kind of hardship you describe"

Your wrong again I do see it as a "attempt" and a good willed one at that. But not one that will work or be good for this country in the long run.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
richanddead- how lucky you were that your family didn`t go bankrupt like so many other families do in a situation like yours or worse. Are you able to see beyond your selfish, myopic view of the world or are you a right-winger through and through?

Too bad you can`t see that the ACA is an attempt to prevent the very kind of hardship you describe and can`t appreciate it.
0
Reply
Male 3,947
But you can shove it if you think I don`t know what it costs. I still help my parents out by giving them most of my money.


But none of that changes the fact that this is a horrible law that has already caused more to lose their insurance than it has signed up and that people should pay for their own issues period. And you trying to deflect it to being a man vs. woman issue, or the same insurance rules as before, or allowing the politicians you like to lie so they can win elections just proves your own hypocrisy.
0
Reply
Male 3,947
The costs were hundreds of thousands of dollars which the hospital did eat the bill initially and the taxpayers did pay for...initially. But we were not off the hook. We still had to pay back all that money, which all of us in the family have overtime. We are down to $85,000 which is far less than what we did owe. We had to sacrifice two of my grandparents inheritances, my fathers practice, at several points our electrical power, two cars (one brand new), I had to drop out of college for a year, and I had to pick up two jobs. Let alone the pink slips that would show up on our door that said our house would be put up for auction if we didn`t make the next payment. We all went threw hell for quite a while. But it was and is our debt, no one elses! We are paying back for what we owe, we aren`t sitting with our hands out asking why can`t others just give us all their money. poo happens, but you still have to pay your own way.
0
Reply
Male 3,947
@lauriloo: "I`m assuming you`ve never needed healthcare (or your parents paid) and therefore have no idea what things cost. Ahh, the innocence of youth."

Your right I`ve never needed healthcare because I`m am young, your right, and I don`t have all the diseases that come with age. And yes I don`t want to subsidize your wrinkly ass either.

But you`re both wrong and arrogant in that I "have no idea what things cost." My father has hereditary type 1 diabetes. If he doesn`t take 3 injections a day, he`s dead. And he isn`t fat either he`s a string bean at 160 pounds and being 6`4``. Despite this, he still developed neuropathies in his foot, which caused a bone infection. We were one of the ones who couldn`t afford insurance because of preexisting conditions. When he had to have multiple amputations to stop the infection, the hospital still admitted us and did the surgery despite what dems. said about not being able to get needed care without insurance.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
[quote]I`m assuming you`ve never needed healthcare (or your parents paid) and therefore have no idea what things cost.[/quote]

The admittedly ridiculous 5-figure price tags (emphasis on price) is a result of government undermining the individual insurance market via a generous tax break to employers to cover their staff through group insurance. Compounded by state governments mandating a minimum JUST TO HAVE individual health insurance. I could go on.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
[quote]it`s a big shock to people how insurance and distributed risk works[/quote]

Even then that`s not how auto insurance works. Just imagine: those greedy selfish companies forced to offer policies to Lindsey Lohan and the like and can`t charge her more than everyone else. Distributed risk is the same as subsidizing bad driving habits. Distributed risk in health insurance amounts subsidizing bad health habits of a few. Then again maybe if governments didn`t restrict insurance options pre-PPACA conscientious diabetics could get reliable policies they like.
0
Reply
Male 7,337
DFWBrysco-"less than 7% of the entire population of the US"

Pulling numbers out of your ass again? Estimates are that 93 million will lose current insurance. That`s 13% of the US population.

DFWBrysco-"Nobody ever promised that the ACA would be the perfect solution for everyone"

No, but SOMEONE DID promise that if you liked your isurance, you could keep it.

"we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your health-care plan, you`ll be able to keep your health-care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what." - B. Obama

"And if you like your insurance plan, you will keep it. No one will be able to take that away from you. It hasn`t happened yet. It won`t happen in the future." - B. Obama

"FACT: Nothing in Obamacare forces people out of their health plans." - B. Obama

So, you agree with lauriloo that Obama is a lying sack of 5hit?
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"We don`t, it`s not a man vs. women issue, you shouldn`t pay for prostate exams and I don`t want to pay for maternity insurance. People should pay for their own issues period."

I see. So we should all just have health savings accounts instead and if you don`t have enough in your account to cover your problem, tough titty! Awesome. I`m assuming you`ve never needed healthcare (or your parents paid) and therefore have no idea what things cost. Ahh, the innocence of youth.
0
Reply
Male 307
Oh gee... less than 7% of the entire population of the US that has coverage is going to bitch because their cut-rate insurance that doesn`t meet minimum requirements and is going to get cancelled...

Nobody ever promised that the ACA would be the perfect solution for everyone.

Yeah, let`s be a tea-bagger and stand up for all of us that can`t take responsibility for a decent plan that covers our own medical bills!
0
Reply
Male 3,947
"Why do men think they should get a free pass all the time?"

We don`t, it`s not a man vs. women issue, you shouldn`t pay for prostate exams and I don`t want to pay for maternity insurance. People should pay for their own issues period.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"Thanks for making my point, these expanded coverages are full of hidden taxes for things you`ll personally never need so you can fund the entitlement and YOU`RE STILL PAYING FOR EVERYONE ELSE!!! "

I`ve been covering things I`ll never use THE ENTIRE TIME! Welcome to how insurance works. Before the ACA, most people didn`t give a second thought about any of this and now that it`s here, it`s a big shock to people how insurance and distributed risk works.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"Failing to sell a un-married man maternity insurance is in no way discriminatory. "

I`m an unmarried woman almost in menopause so I`ll never need it either but I`m not whining. Also will never need prostate exams, smoking cessation, or drug counseling either. Why do men think they should get a free pass all the time?
0
Reply
Male 3,947
@lauriloo:
"This was to prevent gender discrimination"

How is it to prevent gender discrimination when the law states the insurance has to take you no matter what.

" you boys will need the prostate coverage I`m chipping in for. So thank me! "

Thanks for making my point, these expanded coverages are full of hidden taxes for things you`ll personally never need so you can fund the entitlement and YOU`RE STILL PAYING FOR EVERYONE ELSE!!!

"I don`t have any kids so why do my property taxes pay for schools"

Excellent point, public education, another thing government is failing hard at and billing everyone else increasingly. Its like the midas touch in reverse, everything the government gets their hands on turns to poo.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"YOU are the perfect Obama Voter."

Thanks! I`ll be the perfect Clinton voter next.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"So you agree that Obama is a lying sack of 5hit? "

No. But I think you are a right wing, closed-minded ideologue who will never be happy in life if you constantly look for things to complain about instead of seeing the greater good that`s happening all around you. How`s that?
0
Reply
Male 7,337
lauriloo-"This was to prevent gender discrimination"

Failing to sell a un-married man maternity insurance is in no way discriminatory.

lauriloo-"I don`t have any kids"

Thank God for that.

BTW...you`ve answer my previous observation. YOU are the perfect Obama Voter.
0
Reply
Male 3,947
@lauriloo: First off people have the choose to buy cars and therefore car insurance. They are not fined for not buying a car. Nor does the gov. fine you for eating food you grew yourself.

Second
" if the lack of your health coverage didn`t result in the rest of us picking up your tab when you get sick or hurt"

Where do you think this money is coming from? It didn`t magically come into being. People are still paying for it, it`s just in their inflated premiums for things like male pregnancies.

0
Reply
Male 7,337
lauriloo-"A) Get back to me when you have a real number."

Those numbers were based on the estimates of the Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 116 / Thursday, June 17, 2010
Which, btw, was BEFORE many of Obama`s promises.

You`ve so far failed to answer this, so again: So you agree that Obama is a lying sack of 5hit?

lauriloo-"B) include an analysis of how many actually don`t like their new policy"

It would be the majority of them, as they`re having to pay MORE for things they don`t need. (Or do you really think someone like Gerry1of1 NEEDS maternity insurance?)

lauriloo-"When the gov decided there was a minimum amount of liability auto insurance"

Sorry, the auto insurance argument does not fly, as it`s required if you drive your car on public roads. If you don`t
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"But it`s ok because these policies offer you so much more, like if you`re a man and you`re worried about getting pregnant. No, it`s not a hidden tax they really are worried males will start having pregnancies."

This was to prevent gender discrimination that has been prevalent in the past. If it makes you feel better, my insurance covers stuff only men get. Odds are very slim I`ll ever need maternity coverage but very good you boys will need the prostate coverage I`m chipping in for. So thank me!

I don`t have any kids so why do my property taxes pay for schools?????? Dammit, I should get a discount!!!!!!
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"A predicted 93 million. That`s a WEE bit more than `a small number`. "

A) Get back to me when you have a real number. B) include an analysis of how many actually don`t like their new policy other than for having to change when they didn`t think they would have to.
0
Reply
Male 3,947
93 million lose their insurance so that 20 million can gain insurance. But its ok they can just forget about any previous promises or the validity of our elected officials statements and relook for competitive insurance from a limited, hand-chosen, Obama approved list of insurers.

But it`s ok because these policies offer you so much more, like if you`re a man and you`re worried about getting pregnant. No, it`s not a hidden tax they really are worried males will start having pregnancies.

And all of this hinges on young Americans, who would pay less anyways if they just took the fine, buying exorbitant policies to pay for even more bloated entitlements for the baby-boomer generation that has sucked dry the wealth of the country and is preparing to leave the bill for their kids anyways. Because after all the funding for Obamacare was found to be double counted anyways. It makes so much sense.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"federal government the authority to dictate the terms of private contracts?"

I dunno. When the gov decided there was a minimum amount of liability auto insurance or when they regulate the quality of our food, safety of goods we purchase and the quality of our environment?

Frankly, if the lack of your health coverage didn`t result in the rest of us picking up your tab when you get sick or hurt, I couldn`t care less what bed you picked to lie in to save yourself a few bucks.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
0
Reply
Male 17,512
0
Reply
Male 7,337
lauriloo-"a small number of you"

A predicted 93 million. That`s a WEE bit more than `a small number`.

lauriloo-"may need to change your existing policies to meet the basic standards of the ACA"

But see, that`s not what he said.

Just a few ways he said it:
"we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your health-care plan, you`ll be able to keep your health-care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what."

"And if you like your insurance plan, you will keep it. No one will be able to take that away from you. It hasn`t happened yet. It won`t happen in the future."

"FACT: Nothing in Obamacare forces people out of their health plans."

So, you agree that Obama is a lying sack of 5hit?
0
Reply
Male 7,337
lauriloo-"The gov didn`t cancel these people`s policies, the greedy insurers did."

The insurer and the policy holder had come to a mutual agreement for cost and coverage.

Obamacare now comes along and says `You can no longer sell them that policy, or we will arrest you.`

So, yes, the government WAS the cause of the cancellation of those policies.

Something the President said wouldn`t happen.

So, you agree that Obama is a lying sack of 5hit?
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]rather than simply improve their policy to meet the standards like my insurer did[/quote]
Could you please point out the article in the constitution that gives the federal government the authority to dictate the terms of private contracts? I guess I somehow missed that one.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
[quote]rather than simply improve their policy to meet the standards like my insurer did[/quote]

Riiggghht, because they`re soooo "competitive" simply by the grace of the fact that they meet government "standards". <Rolls eyes>
0
Reply
Female 1,803
OR, the GOP is inflating the issue. OR, when the GOP is attempting to scare people with death panels and other BS Obama couldn`t say something like "a small number of you may need to change your existing policies to meet the basic standards of the ACA" because the GOP would inflate that to mean all people had to change their policies. OR, there was no predicting that the insurance companies would choose to cancel people rather than simply improve their policy to meet the standards like my insurer did. The gov didn`t cancel these people`s policies, the greedy insurers did.

When you are the people who don`t play fair and won`t use data and facts to inform your followers, don`t complain when you can`t be given perfectly straight information. Look what happened when small businesses got the delay break. The GOP jumped on that and made it a negative. Would serve them right if Obama took it back and said "see, I tried to be nice but the GOP ruined it"
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"Funny I don`t see you saying that during a gun debate to Europeans. Just replace president with gun laws......"

Your point doesn`t make sense to me. What European has repeatedly supported the NRA in the US on here? What other person, other than 5Cats, has repeatedly slammed another country`s government, Obama in particular? No other person on here so rabidly hates another country`s gov. If he was so manic about something constructive that actually affected him, I might understand but what he does, I just can`t understand it other than to believe it`s for attention.
0
Reply
Male 7,337
OldOllie-"Well, there are only two possibilies: 1) He didn`t know, in which case he`s an incompetent f***tard. 2) He did know, in which case he`s a lying sack of dog $#!+. Take your pick"

And, to make it even MORE simple, if you think that the above statement is neither fair nor accurate....Congratulations: You`re the perfect Obama Voter. (i.e. dumber than 5hit)
0
Reply
Male 36,360
[quote]In other words: screw arguing, I`m just going to go straight to poisoning the well.[/quote]
@cajun247: Exactly! At least @lauriloo usually TRIES to make a point first, THEN throws poop.

Heaven Forbid that the IAB Liberal Brigade should ANSWER the question, eh? Or offer a defense of Obama`s words that don`t involve "Republicans Do It WOOOOORSE" or like that.

Or notice that Democrats line up and REPEAT the lies, even after they`ve been exposes AS LIES?

Heck no!

"This is boring, why talk about it? Lets talk about... BUSH!"
Or Sarah Palin...
0
Reply
Male 14,330
[quote]What?? Someone who doesn`t even live in this country constantly, rabidly berating our president is crazy?[/quote]

Funny I don`t see you saying that during a gun debate to Europeans. Just replace president with gun laws......

[
0
Reply
Male 10,845
[quote]Someone who doesn`t even live in this country constantly, rabidly berating our president is crazy? Say it isn`t so! Yeah, he`s mental. Don`t try to understand crazy. It`ll just make you crazy.[/quote]

In other words: screw arguing, I`m just going to go straight to poisoning the well.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"You see.. this is exactly what I am talking about 5Cats. Here we have a SECOND post about the same damn thing. It makes you look obsessed and crazy. "

What?? Someone who doesn`t even live in this country constantly, rabidly berating our president is crazy? Say it isn`t so! Yeah, he`s mental. Don`t try to understand crazy. It`ll just make you crazy.
0
Reply
Male 1,289
=/ I give this post a 1 because it`s a repeat of the last 5Cats political post
0
Reply
Male 36,360
@elkingo: Well? When Obama and the Democrats FIX the problems and start TELLING THE TRUTH? That`s when it becomes a non-issue.
And I don`t mean the website, that`s a `symptom` eh? I mean the corruption from the PotUS on down...

It`s like saying, in the 70`s, "Oh Watergate? We talked about that LAST WEEK. No need to mention it again..." while the impeachment hearings were underway... um? NO!

People deserve to see ALL the evidence as it comes out! To hear ALL the LIES as the Democrats tell them! Obama does NOT "get a free pass" after 10 scandals or 100 lies (whichever comes first) OK?

I`ve offered plenty of -other- political suggestions, they`re in the `Live Submissions` for those who are interested...
0
Reply
Male 5,620
I rated it a 1 not because of the content, but because I already saw the same thing in another post. At best this post will generate some more insulting conversation that has little to nothing to do with the actual politics of what is going on here.
0
Reply
Male 36,360
Newest Spin: Your Old Policy Was A SCAM A scam! And you were TOO DUMB to notice! But Obama has saved you! He`s made things better by raising your payments and lowering your coverage!

Note: This is Piers Morgan`s interview on CNN. Even Piers is offended!

Frank Pallone (D) is not some `low ranking` person! His claims that ObamaCare stops these "scam policies" is so... Typical!
It might be laughable if it weren`t so serious. He lies even more: he claims you can still buy the same policies you had... but you (OBVIOUSLY) cannot because they`ve been CANCELLED by OBAMACARE`s rules! He cannot even LIE properly!
0
Reply
Male 5,620
You see.. this is exactly what I am talking about 5Cats. Here we have a SECOND post about the same damn thing. It makes you look obsessed and crazy.

This is what I meant by being SELECTIVE. You simply should not have submitted 2 or more posts about the EXACT same thing.

0
Reply
Male 883

0
Reply
Male 7,775
I think Old Ollie nailed this one.
0
Reply
Male 36,360
Joe Biden Is An Idiot

Just in case you`ve forgotten...

And remember ALL THOSE TIMES the Repubs and Tea Party WARNED Y`ALL that ObamaCare wasn`t what Obama claimed? And were called racists (or worse) for even SUGGESTING that? Remember that?

I sure do!

And this would be my second "political post" on the front page, my first for today.

Whiners... censorists...
0
Reply
Male 36,360
NOT FAUXXNEWS! Liberal Whiners...

Forbes Says 129 Million May Lose Their Current Policies

Because Obama unilaterally ordered that employer plans get a 1 year `reprieve`, remember that? When the rules DO apply to them? Guess what?

Like it or not: YOUR policy is GONE!

Even With Subsidies? You`ll still pay more! For less coverage!

Yet the White House continues to lie! The MSM has just barely started to report on HOW BAD things really are under the ACA...

Male 15,832
Well, there are only two possibilies:

1) He didn`t know, in which case he`s an incompetent f***tard.

2) He did know, in which case he`s a lying sack of dog $#!+.

Take your pick.
0
Reply
Female 3,178
Absolutely they knew, and it doesn`t matter if you can get heathcare or already on it (my premiums have skyrocketed and i only make 20k a year) or not.. or sign up for 0bamacare or not... its all moot because THEY still get your money and that`s the bottom line. FU america, we have to fund ourselves and your enemies.
0
Reply
Male 2,552
Seriously? Of COURSE they knew--they just didn`t CARE.
0
Reply
Male 36,360
Link: Did Obama And The White House Know? [Pic+] [Rate Link] - NBC Investigations asks if they knew millions would lose their current healthcare plan, and lied about it.
0
Reply