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.

The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Meanwhile, back "on topic":

WASHINGTON—The U.S. government estimates as many as six million households may have to pay a penalty for not having had health-insurance coverage last year as required under the Affordable Care Act, officials said Wednesday.
Click to expand...

Wasn't the whole "point" of PPACA to provide health insurance to the uninsured? and weren't there "only" around 36 million uninsured to begin with? seems like a pretty high "failure rate" based on this one metric at least. :(
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

FreshFish said:
Meanwhile, back "on topic":



Wasn't the whole "point" of PPACA to provide health insurance to the uninsured? and weren't there "only" around 36 million uninsured to begin with? seems like a pretty high "failure rate" based on this one metric at least. :(
Click to expand...

Six million pay a penalty, supposedly around 10 million signed up... wonder how many of the rest are able to claim that health care truly was unaffordable?
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

joecct said:
Job creator vs unwashed people who invaded his capitol?

You play ball with the governor or get the bat up your a..
Click to expand...

That's how federal grants are handed out, even more so now than how it used to be since earmark spending is out the window. I was reading this on news.yahoo yesterday, so of course I can't find the story today, at any rate...

Red states (defined as voting <45% for the president) lost federal grants at a rate of around 47% compared to the Bush years while Battleground and Blue states saw net gains in grants awarded between the years 2009-2013. This has been a common practice for both parties over the years, but with earmark spending no longer permitted with current House leadership, the Executive branch has amplified the effect in recent years.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Kepler said:
inequality is virtually ignored in this country.
Click to expand...

says the rich, privileged elitist.....



More to the point, if one believes in "equality of opportunity" then inequality is inevitable. Line people up at the starting line of a race, and some will finish sooner than others. That's inequality. What would you do? Saddle the faster runners with extra weights? How can that possibly help the slower runners run any faster?

I'm all in favor of removing barriers to equality of opportunity, by helping to raise up those at the bottom. I've never once seen any convincing evidence that tearing down the people at the top helps anyone (except as a salve to those with a guilty conscience).
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

FreshFish said:
Meanwhile, back "on topic":



Wasn't the whole "point" of PPACA to provide health insurance to the uninsured? and weren't there "only" around 36 million uninsured to begin with? seems like a pretty high "failure rate" based on this one metric at least. :(
Click to expand...
So between 7 and 9 million people have signed up for insurance through Obamacare, there are ~6 million being fined for not having insurance, and we had estimates of 36 million uninsured when the law passed in 2009. What happened to the other 21 million? Were they all shuffled into Medicaid?
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

FreshFish said:
says the rich, privileged elitist.....



More to the point, if one believes in "equality of opportunity" then inequality is inevitable. Line people up at the starting line of a race, and some will finish sooner than others. That's inequality. What would you do? Saddle the faster runners with extra weights? How can that possibly help the slower runners run any faster?
Click to expand...

Give them jet packs. :p:D And yes, eventually they will run out of fuel.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

St. Clown said:
So between 7 and 9 million people have signed up for insurance through Obamacare, there are ~6 million being fined for not having insurance, and we had estimates of 36 million uninsured when the law passed in 2009. What happened to the other 21 million? Were they all shuffled into Medicaid?
Click to expand...

They fall under "hardships" where the coverage truly was "unaffordable".
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

From the Congressional Budget Office:

The CBO report devotes an entire chapter to ... ObamaCare, presenting three distressing facts on the programs next five years:
• The cost of subsidies on the exchanges will more than triple, from $32 billion to $106 billion in 2020.
• Over the same period, federal Medicaid costs (also goosed by the ObamaCare law) will double.
• Despite all the spending, 30 million people will still be uninsured. That’s more than the number the law helps.

[and a] new CBO prediction: Some 9 million to 10 million people will lose their employer-provided coverage in the next three years. Some will wind up on Medicaid, others in subsidized exchange plans.
Click to expand...


Somehow, an 'oops, my bad' won't quite cut it....there were reported to be 36 to 38 million uninsured before PPACA and by 2020 under PPACA we will still have 30 million uninsured? :eek:

It sounds like the law is taking health insurance away from more people (9 to 10 million) than it is providing health insurance for new people (6 to 8 million).

and this is from the CBO. :(
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Elizabeth does it again.

Senator Elizabeth Warren introduced the Medical Innovation Act on the Senate floor on January 29, 2015. The legislation would require large pharmaceutical companies that break the law and settle with the federal government to reinvest a small percentage of their profits into the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Click to expand...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIJGmbwkNvU
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Can you imagine the character assassination the Clintons, let alone the Echo Chamber, have planned for her if she runs? This time next year, the righties on this board will be completely convinced she's a Reptilian who feeds off the blood of Christian babies.
 
Kepler said:
Can you imagine the character assassination the Clintons, let alone the Echo Chamber, have planned for her if she runs? This time next year, the righties on this board will be completely convinced she's a Reptilian who feeds off the blood of Christian babies.
Click to expand...
RMN now thinks it's going to be Clinton / O'Malley ticket.

It will depend on how much Liz ticks off Wall Street and how serious the monied ones want get out. With enough money she can be portrayed as left of Che. Perversely the same money could portray her as a member of the Poor Clares.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

joecct said:
RMN now thinks it's going to be Clinton / O'Malley ticket.

It will depend on how much Liz ticks off Wall Street and how serious the monied ones want get out. With enough money she can be portrayed as left of Che. Perversely the same money could portray her as a member of the Poor Clares.
Click to expand...

Royal Malaysian Navy?

O'Malley is as good as Biden for "bland white male to salve a historical first." He was my Gov and I can't name a thing he did.

The WSJ and those types portrayed Obama as Lenin, and Obama is as center-right as an Iowa ombudsman. Liz appears to be The Real Thing. Since they can't actually portray her any more insanely than they did Obama, with whom they showed no restraint in just lying, or screech any louder, since they employed all their propagandists last time, I assume if she ever gets near office they will simply murder her. Self-determination and democracy are all very well, but we're talking about trillions of dollars, here.

Right and might are always fighting
In our youth it seems exciting
Right is always nearly winning
Might can hardly keep from grinning
 
Last edited:
Kepler said:
Royal Malaysian Navy?

O'Malley is as good as Biden for "bland white male to salve a historical first." He was my Gov and I can't name a thing he did.

The WSJ and those types portrayed Obama as Lenin, and Obama is as center-right as an Iowa ombudsman. Liz appears to be The Real Thing. Since they can't actually portray her any more insanely than they did Obama, with whom they showed no restraint in just lying, or screech any louder, since they employed all their propagandists last time, I assume if she ever gets near office they will simply murder her. Self-determination and democracy are all very well, but we're talking about trillions of dollars, here.

Right and might are always fighting
In our youth it seems exciting
Right is always nearly winning
Might can hardly keep from grinning
Click to expand...

Milhous :)

The Left is also very good at, and has a tame media in its pocket, making a non-liberal as Genghis Khan's top lieutenant.

Nothing has changed since the founding of the Republic. Nowadays character assassination happens in real time with no media lag.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Our town (population just under 28,000) recently had to renegotiate a contract with town employees to change their health insurance plan so as to avoid the "Cadillac tax".
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

I wonder sometimes if people who appear as if they do not understand the difference between health "care" and health "insurance" are really as ignorant as that, or whether they are deliberately obfuscating because it makes for more sensational politics. :(

Similar to those who claim that, merely because the drafters of PPACA had good intentions, that somehow makes PPACA a good law in actuality. We are not any better off than we were before, we merely replaced one set of problems with a different set of problems. That's not an improvement. :(
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

FreshFish said:
...or whether they are deliberately obfuscating because it makes for more sensational politics. :(
Click to expand...

"Remember the other day, when you were asking me about the definition of irony?"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top