P
Priceless
Guest
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
I think that's on a banner hanging at the Whittemore Center...
I think that's on a banner hanging at the Whittemore Center...
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.
The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
- Thread starter joecct
- Start date
- Status
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
All this would be well and good had your compatriots not made claims like 150M losing insurance, massive unemployment, death panels snuffing grandma, etc.
In sporting terms, think of it like this. People who idolize Peyton Manning thought he'd win in a walk over the Seahawks last year. Halfway through the 1st quarter, all of those people should have gotten a sense of how wrong they were going in. Now, think of ACA supporters as the Seahawks, and yourselves as old, creaky Peyton Manning.
You do of course realize that the uninsured rate for 20yrs prior to the numbers you posted was about 16.3%.
While the increase in the past few years is probably from the economic downturn, just grossly looking at the graph, one could argue that the passage of the ACA caused the increase and it's now stabilizing back to norm since policymakers now know what's in it
Overall, it's way too soon to say the ACA is a success or failure. Most of the current estimates say that less than 20% of people signing up on the exchanges had no previous insurance (in other words, 80+% had and lost their insurance for one reason or another.) so it may be making progress even though the overview suggests that Medicaid expansion is what's responsible. Regardless, to offer up the current stats as evidence of the ACA's success is similar to celebrating a National Championship because your team scored the tying goal in the first period of the first round game
All this would be well and good had your compatriots not made claims like 150M losing insurance, massive unemployment, death panels snuffing grandma, etc.
In sporting terms, think of it like this. People who idolize Peyton Manning thought he'd win in a walk over the Seahawks last year. Halfway through the 1st quarter, all of those people should have gotten a sense of how wrong they were going in. Now, think of ACA supporters as the Seahawks, and yourselves as old, creaky Peyton Manning.
busterman62
I got a pocket full of kryptonite
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
The main problem with your reasoning(sic) here is that (staying with your Super Bowl analogy) the ACA implementation is only to the point of Joe Namath tossing the coin early. Too soon to even have a clue who the Seahawk fans are
All this would be well and good had your compatriots not made claims like 150M losing insurance, massive unemployment, death panels snuffing grandma, etc.
In sporting terms, think of it like this. People who idolize Peyton Manning thought he'd win in a walk over the Seahawks last year. Halfway through the 1st quarter, all of those people should have gotten a sense of how wrong they were going in. Now, think of ACA supporters as the Seahawks, and yourselves as old, creaky Peyton Manning.
The main problem with your reasoning(sic) here is that (staying with your Super Bowl analogy) the ACA implementation is only to the point of Joe Namath tossing the coin early. Too soon to even have a clue who the Seahawk fans are
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
Actually, the game's already started, as the ACA implementation has already happened for the vast majority of people....
Actually, the game's already started, as the ACA implementation has already happened for the vast majority of people....
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
"Don't bogart that joint, my friend, pass it over to me."
Meanwhile, back in THIS universe....
The rest of the article speculates about why this new rule was implemented and why its implementation was kept so quiet.
"Don't bogart that joint, my friend, pass it over to me."
Meanwhile, back in THIS universe....
The rest of the article speculates about why this new rule was implemented and why its implementation was kept so quiet.
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
If a knuckledragger falls down in the woods, and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound?
Problem for you is this - rate of uninsured is going down. IF, in fact, the ACA was causing 50M people to lose insurance, then the rate of the uninsured would be going up, right? Simply put the O is giving an extra two years for these non-compliant policies to peter out and by the estimates I've seen no more than 500K people are actually taking advantage of this delay. Now before you bleat something about how they're all being strung along on non-compliant policies, be aware that not all states (CA for example) or all insurers have gone along with this, so in fact these people have gone out and found new polices.
So, not much ado about nothing.
"Don't bogart that joint, my friend, pass it over to me."
Meanwhile, back in THIS universe....
The rest of the article speculates about why this new rule was implemented and why its implementation was kept so quiet.
If a knuckledragger falls down in the woods, and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound?
Problem for you is this - rate of uninsured is going down. IF, in fact, the ACA was causing 50M people to lose insurance, then the rate of the uninsured would be going up, right? Simply put the O is giving an extra two years for these non-compliant policies to peter out and by the estimates I've seen no more than 500K people are actually taking advantage of this delay. Now before you bleat something about how they're all being strung along on non-compliant policies, be aware that not all states (CA for example) or all insurers have gone along with this, so in fact these people have gone out and found new polices.
So, not much ado about nothing.
unofan
Well-known member
Off year elections always suck for the presidents party.
But 2016 could be an equally bad bloodbath for the GOP if they go full Batshiat and nominate someone like Rand Paul or Ted Cruz. They have to defend all those tea party seats in a presidential year where they can't count on a low turnout helping them. If they nominate someone crazy that paints the whole party that way, Katie bar the door
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
I'm not too worried about losing a special election in a district formerly held by a Republican and chock full of old white people. What I don't like however is the Dems inability to find nominees who enjoy retail politicking and who can explain their positions in a clear and concise manner when put on the spot.
From my limited following of the race, Alex Sink = Martha Coakley (the person who lost Senate special election to Scott Brown). Dems and especially libs tend to have a problem of realizing that just having the "right" positions doesn't mean you're going to win an election. You need to get out there and show people why you deserve their vote. Blasting Jolly with negative ads is fine, but there's got to be a counterweight to that. This is the same thing that sunk the Kerry Presidential campaign in a winnable race as well.
Not every candidate needs to be as colorful as Fast Eddie Edwards (rumored to be running for Congress in LA at the ripe old age of 86), but you also have to be more compelling than burnt toast.
I'm not too worried about losing a special election in a district formerly held by a Republican and chock full of old white people. What I don't like however is the Dems inability to find nominees who enjoy retail politicking and who can explain their positions in a clear and concise manner when put on the spot.
From my limited following of the race, Alex Sink = Martha Coakley (the person who lost Senate special election to Scott Brown). Dems and especially libs tend to have a problem of realizing that just having the "right" positions doesn't mean you're going to win an election. You need to get out there and show people why you deserve their vote. Blasting Jolly with negative ads is fine, but there's got to be a counterweight to that. This is the same thing that sunk the Kerry Presidential campaign in a winnable race as well.
Not every candidate needs to be as colorful as Fast Eddie Edwards (rumored to be running for Congress in LA at the ripe old age of 86), but you also have to be more compelling than burnt toast.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
I like that people who are bad at math are saying that the number of people enrolling went down in February. Pop quiz: What month has ONLY 28 days? Hey, it's February! What a coincidence.
New Republic
I like that people who are bad at math are saying that the number of people enrolling went down in February. Pop quiz: What month has ONLY 28 days? Hey, it's February! What a coincidence.
New Republic
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
Yeah I was amused by that too. CNBC has some shill covering health care that tries to spin every story along those lines. Oddly enough, enrollment per day actually picked up in February. When they end March in the mid-6M sign up range that's **** good and 6+M nails in conservatives coffins.
Yeah I was amused by that too. CNBC has some shill covering health care that tries to spin every story along those lines. Oddly enough, enrollment per day actually picked up in February. When they end March in the mid-6M sign up range that's **** good and 6+M nails in conservatives coffins.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
1,200,000 / 35 = 34.285.7
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
Nah, Mitch may get primaried out. That could be interesting. Don't know how interesting since I don't pay attention to that region's politics.
Nah, Mitch may get primaried out. That could be interesting. Don't know how interesting since I don't pay attention to that region's politics.
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
Really? I thought that once people found out what was in it, they'd be overjoyed! Nancy and Harry and Barry told us so! This law is wonderful! We keep hearing it all the time.
I mean, if you lose your job, no big deal. thanks to this wonderful law, you now have the freedom to do what you want. We keep hearing that week after week.
Shouldn't this wonderful law lead to all sorts of big electoral gains for the Democrats this fall? Won't we hear them enthusiastically telling us how thankful we should be that they all had the wisdom and foresight to pass it?
I mean, it sounds like the culmination of the american dream. i don't understand why you are complaining. and why are you calling it a "stupid" law? I thought it was the apex of enlightenment. I mean, we are going to cut costs, expand coverage, improve outcomes, the President promised.
Really? I thought that once people found out what was in it, they'd be overjoyed! Nancy and Harry and Barry told us so! This law is wonderful! We keep hearing it all the time.
I mean, if you lose your job, no big deal. thanks to this wonderful law, you now have the freedom to do what you want. We keep hearing that week after week.
Shouldn't this wonderful law lead to all sorts of big electoral gains for the Democrats this fall? Won't we hear them enthusiastically telling us how thankful we should be that they all had the wisdom and foresight to pass it?
I mean, it sounds like the culmination of the american dream. i don't understand why you are complaining. and why are you calling it a "stupid" law? I thought it was the apex of enlightenment. I mean, we are going to cut costs, expand coverage, improve outcomes, the President promised.
Last edited:
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
You already know what's going to happen. Some media outlets will report a number close to that but it will come from sketchy sources and will be argued on semantics as to what the "real" number really is. It's been going on with unemployment numbers for a while now. There are still way to many ongoing issues that it's never going to be over, so don't get your hopes up.
Yeah I was amused by that too. CNBC has some shill covering health care that tries to spin every story along those lines. Oddly enough, enrollment per day actually picked up in February. When they end March in the mid-6M sign up range that's **** good and 6+M nails in conservatives coffins.
You already know what's going to happen. Some media outlets will report a number close to that but it will come from sketchy sources and will be argued on semantics as to what the "real" number really is. It's been going on with unemployment numbers for a while now. There are still way to many ongoing issues that it's never going to be over, so don't get your hopes up.
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
Reported "enrollment" doesn't really matter, it is how many people who actually pay a premium and receive a policy that counts. For some reason those numbers don't appear anywhere.
Reported "enrollment" doesn't really matter, it is how many people who actually pay a premium and receive a policy that counts. For some reason those numbers don't appear anywhere.
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
You're right, but from my perspective this is a lot easier. By the end of the year, we will be able to answer two basic questions. 1) Is the # of uninsured going down, and 2) are costs stabilizing? If the answer to both is yes, the law's a success. People can then argue the semantics, and truthfully some things will become clearer over time, such as how many people didn't have insurance previously. However, the ultimate measure is going to be fairly plain for all to see.
The nail in conservatives coffin is because they've painted themselves into a corner regarding what's achievable. Regardless of where they came from, right now about 13M people have health care directly as a result of the ACA (exchanges, expanded Medicaid, parents covering kids up to 26). Repeal the law and 13M people are looking for new insurance all at once. By the time the GOP could possibly get an opportunity to do this (Jan 2017), that number very well might double. Passing a law to kick all those people out the door would be electoral suicide, yet the base voters are going to demand it even though its virtually impossible. I don't see that ending well.
You're right, but from my perspective this is a lot easier. By the end of the year, we will be able to answer two basic questions. 1) Is the # of uninsured going down, and 2) are costs stabilizing? If the answer to both is yes, the law's a success. People can then argue the semantics, and truthfully some things will become clearer over time, such as how many people didn't have insurance previously. However, the ultimate measure is going to be fairly plain for all to see.
The nail in conservatives coffin is because they've painted themselves into a corner regarding what's achievable. Regardless of where they came from, right now about 13M people have health care directly as a result of the ACA (exchanges, expanded Medicaid, parents covering kids up to 26). Repeal the law and 13M people are looking for new insurance all at once. By the time the GOP could possibly get an opportunity to do this (Jan 2017), that number very well might double. Passing a law to kick all those people out the door would be electoral suicide, yet the base voters are going to demand it even though its virtually impossible. I don't see that ending well.
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
I always count on you to report something stupid that you just heard on right wing talk radio! Was it Rush or Hannity who told you this?
In reality people who've paid is in the 85% range, and that includes people who've signed up but who's policies don't take effect for another month, thus giving them plenty of time to get a payment in.
I always count on you to report something stupid that you just heard on right wing talk radio! Was it Rush or Hannity who told you this?
In reality people who've paid is in the 85% range, and that includes people who've signed up but who's policies don't take effect for another month, thus giving them plenty of time to get a payment in.
St. Clown
Liberal Rebel Scum, apparently
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!
The fine is assessed when filing taxes. It's either added to your taxes owed or deducted from your refund.
The fine is assessed when filing taxes. It's either added to your taxes owed or deducted from your refund.
- Status