What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

5mn_Major said:
So I was correct. Obamacare could greatly improve healthcare and it still won't achieve your 'standards of success'. Reason #37 why the best conservatives deserve is the opposition party.
Click to expand...
It's hardly just my standard:

“We’re going to work with your employer to lower the cost of your premiums by up to $2,500 a year.”
"So to say it as plainly as I can, health care is the single most important thing we can do for America's long-term fiscal health. That is a fact."
"Make no mistake: The cost of our health care is a threat to our economy. It's an escalating burden on our families and businesses. It's a ticking time bomb for the federal budget. And it is unsustainable for the United States of America."
"This law will cut costs and make coverage more affordable for families and small businesses. It’s reform that brings -- that begins to bring down our government’s long-term structural deficit."

Who knew we had a dirty opposition party Republican in the White House?
 
Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

Can some righty explain to me why we need two different GOP responses to the SOTU address? Given that Republican responses are usually a career killer (see Jindal, Bobby) I'm kinda curious why anybody lines up to do one.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

LynahFan said:
It's hardly just my standard:

“We’re going to work with your employer to lower the cost of your premiums by up to $2,500 a year.”
"So to say it as plainly as I can, health care is the single most important thing we can do for America's long-term fiscal health. That is a fact."
"Make no mistake: The cost of our health care is a threat to our economy. It's an escalating burden on our families and businesses. It's a ticking time bomb for the federal budget. And it is unsustainable for the United States of America."
"This law will cut costs and make coverage more affordable for families and small businesses. It’s reform that brings -- that begins to bring down our government’s long-term structural deficit."

Who knew we had a dirty opposition party Republican in the White House?
Click to expand...

Read them again. Those quotes are already true and/or based on industry/technology analysts like Parks associates likely to be true. How do you translate that to both '1) near universal coverage, with 2) lower percentage of GDP spent on healthcare?'
 
Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

5mn_Major said:
Read them again. Those quotes are already true and/or based on industry/technology analysts like Parks associates likely to be true. How do you translate that to both '1) near universal coverage, with 2) lower percentage of GDP spent on healthcare?'
Click to expand...
links?
 
Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

Smaller government for all! Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!

Or not.

PHOENIX — A veteran state lawmaker is pushing legislation that would allow businesses to discriminate against gays — and maybe even women and Jews — as long as they were acting on sincerely held religious beliefs.
SB 1062 would allow those sued in civil cases to claim that they have a legal right to decide not to provide their services to any individual or group because it would “substantially burden” their freedom of religion. And that specifically means doing something that the person feels is contrary to their religious teachings.

Sen. Steve Yarbrough, R-Chandler, said the measure is aimed specifically at preventing what happened in New Mexico where courts there said a gay couple could sue a wedding photographer who turned away their request to take pictures at their nuptials. He said that should not be allowed to happen here.

But Yarbrough said his legislation could also be interpreted broader than that, allowing motel operators with vacant rooms to refuse to rent to gays.

Potentially more significant, Yarbrough acknowledged there may be individuals whose have religious beliefs about unmarried women, or even employing people who do not share their same beliefs.
Click to expand...

Anyone who already works for me that doesn't believe in Unicorns and dragons is fired. And you have to root for Boston-based sports teams or you can pack up your things.
 
Priceless said:
Smaller government for all! Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!

Or not.



Anyone who already works for me that doesn't believe in Unicorns and dragons is fired. And you have to root for Boston-based sports teams or you can pack up your things.
Click to expand...

You can already do the latter. sports fandom is not a protected class.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

I'm a little confused why a GLBT person getting married would want their photos done by someone who is opposed to their marriage or even just uncomfortable. Go to someone who wants the business.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

unofan said:
You can already do the latter. sports fandom is not a protected class.
Click to expand...

What if they don't believe in unicorns and dragons?
 
5mn_Major said:
Read them again. Those quotes are already true and/or based on industry/technology analysts like Parks associates likely to be true. How do you translate that to both '1) near universal coverage, with 2) lower percentage of GDP spent on healthcare?'
Click to expand...
I honestly have no idea what you're asking me. I really don't think my hopes for Obamacare (better healthcare for the US population AND reduced overall spending on health care) are really very different from what the Democrats intended to accomplish. If we improve care while costs continue to spiral out of control, how is that a success? If we slash costs by rationing and cutting care, how is that a success? For me to consider the law to be a success, both pillars (better care, reduced costs) must stand. I really don't know why you have such a problem admitting that reduced cost needs to be part of the discussion - it's been there since Hillarycare (and before), but now it's suddenly irrelevant?
 
Re: 2nd Term Part VII: You May Like Your Doctor But You Can't Keep Her

LynahFan said:
I honestly have no idea what you're asking me. I really don't think my hopes for Obamacare (better healthcare for the US population AND reduced overall spending on health care) are really very different from what the Democrats intended to accomplish. If we improve care while costs continue to spiral out of control, how is that a success? If we slash costs by rationing and cutting care, how is that a success? For me to consider the law to be a success, both pillars (better care, reduced costs) must stand. I really don't know why you have such a problem admitting that reduced cost needs to be part of the discussion - it's been there since Hillarycare (and before), but now it's suddenly irrelevant?
Click to expand...

I'd say it needs to a) reduce the amount of uninsured, and b) reduce the historical growth rate of medical costs. These can be measured fairly easily.

While I understand the population will grow and therefore potentially increase the amount of uninsured, that should be more than made up for by people getting insurance either via 1) coverage from their parents up to age 26, 2) expanded Medicaid, and 3) insurance via the exchanges. There's a 4th category of people who obtain private insurance directly thru insurers themselves but I'm not sure how large a portion of the market that is yet.

Next it is also tracked yearly how overall health care costs are trending. If costs stay around the GDP growth rate, Obamacare has been a success. No whining about "oh its because of this or its because of that". Only a crybaby tries to blame all cost increases on Obamacare, but quickly pivots to find other reasons when costs stabilize. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top