+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 31 to 38 of 38

Thread: Remember when...

  1. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    11,467
    Quote Originally Posted by Mindcrime View Post
    You still haven't explained how having insurance is not the same as having access to health care.

    I didn't change the subject, what I said is a fact. Most people are not able to afford even low-level costs, like chemotherapy or getting an MRI, to say nothing of a major surgery. Mandating that the insurance companies couldn't refuse to cover you because you're sick was the right thing to do. Yes, there are flaws, and the actual cost of healthcare needs to be addressed. In the long run, 30 Million more people will be covered, it will save us money over the next decade and reduce the deficit. That's the bottom line.
    Any person can walk into a public hospital and by LAW cannot be refused treatment that will stabilize said person. In cases, this includes very costly procedures like dialysis, surgeries and other lifesaving procedures. For a person who claims to work in Doc Management you should be coming in contact with doctors and lawyers on a daily basis and know such things.

    Health insurance is ONLY a form of payment, Health Care is the ACT of treating an illness.

    You seem like the person that would go to a knife fight with a banana.

    Oh and the newest CBO report stated that less than 20 million people will be covered. SO the price went up by 1 Trillion and the number of people being covered went down by 50%.
    "I know you guys enjoy reading my stuff because it all makes sense. "

    Dumbest post ever! Thanks for the laugh PO!

  2. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,747
    Quote Originally Posted by Mindcrime View Post
    You still haven't explained how having insurance is not the same as having access to health care.
    I should not have to explain the obvious...even to idiots like yourself.

  3. #33
    Member granpabob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lexington, South Carolina
    Posts
    3,600
    I have always wondered why the delay. if this play is so great why wasn't it put in place right away so Obama could run for reelection on how great it worked. His 10 year plan was flawed from the start. when passed money to pay for it has to start being collected even through it does not start until four rears later, the first four years money is collected with no bills to pay then six years of paying. all of this juggling is so they can average the 6 year cost out over 10 years and make it seem lower.
    I ask why is this needed if this plan is so great. now it is too late Obama will run on what he cliams it will do one more time. I see many of my freinds who have already lost coverage because of the rising cost I can not Imagine how many more will loose coverage or their jobs as the full plans cost hits the economy
    One good thing about growing old is your secrets are safe with your friends they can't remember them either

  4. #34
    Member Mindcrime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    3,621
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougles View Post
    Any person can walk into a public hospital and by LAW cannot be refused treatment that will stabilize said person. In cases, this includes very costly procedures like dialysis, surgeries and other lifesaving procedures.
    Yes, you can be treated for life-threatening, emergency conditions and not be turned away. And as I said, when you wait until it gets to that point, and go to the ER, we are all paying for it. That's not just socialism, but the most expensive, least efficient form of socialism. So why not pay a fraction of that cost when it can be resolved with a prescription or simple treatment?

    For a person who claims to work in Doc Management you should be coming in contact with doctors and lawyers on a daily basis and know such things.
    Did you pull this out of your butt, too? I've never said such a thing.

    Health insurance is ONLY a form of payment, Health Care is the ACT of treating an illness.
    No, waiting until your only course of action is to go to the emergency room is not healthcare. That's a hail mary to keep yourself alive. Health care is getting regular checkups, having tests done at the first sign of trouble, or engaging in ongoing treatment. Last minute, stabilizing treatment in the ICU is like saying fixing your brakes after they give out is good car care.

    You seem like the person that would go to a knife fight with a banana.
    And you keep slipping on the peel and wind up poking yourself.

    Oh and the newest CBO report stated that less than 20 million people will be covered. SO the price went up by 1 Trillion and the number of people being covered went down by 50%.
    You obviously didn't read the report. You read what some right-wing smear machine said the report said. Otherwise, you'd realize how foolish you sound.
    Your focus determines your reality.

  5. #35
    Member Mindcrime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    3,621
    Quote Originally Posted by leftWNYbecauseofBS View Post
    I should not have to explain the obvious...even to idiots like yourself.
    Translation: "I can't explain that..."
    Your focus determines your reality.

  6. #36
    Member ILOVEDNY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, Tx.
    Posts
    4,943
    Quote Originally Posted by Mindcrime View Post
    You obviously didn't read the report. You read what some right-wing smear machine said the report said. Otherwise, you'd realize how foolish you sound.
    http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/fil...0Estimates.pdf
    CBO and JCT’s projections of health insurance coverage have also changed since last March. Fewer people are now expected to obtain health insurance coverage from their employer or in insurance exchanges; more are now expected to obtain coverage from Medicaid or CHIP or from nongroup or other sources. More are expected to be uninsured.

    The extent of the changes varies from year to year, but in 2016, for example, the ACA is now estimated to reduce the number of people receiving health insurance coverage through an employer by an additional 4 million enrollees relative to the March 2011 projections. In that year, CBO and JCT now estimate that there will be 2 million fewer enrollees in insurance exchanges. In the other direction, CBO and JCT now estimate that, in 2016, the ACA will increase enrollment in Medicaid and CHIP slightly more than previously estimated (but considerably more in 2014 and 2015), and it will reduce the number of people with nongroup or other coverage by 3 million less and the number of uninsured people by 2 million less than previously estimated.

    Compared with prior law, the ACA is now estimated by CBO and JCT to reduce the number of nonelderly people without health insurance coverage by 30 million to 33 million in 2016 and subsequent years, leaving 26 million to 27 million nonelderly residents uninsured in those years.

    From 2016 on, between 20 million and 23 million people will receive coverage through the new insurance exchanges, and 16 million to 17 million people will be enrolled in Medicaid and CHIP. Also, 3 million to 5 million fewer people will have coverage through an employer compared with the number under prior law.

    And here is the key fact.

    Changes in the Economic Outlook
    In its January 2012 economic forecast, CBO revised its projections of certain economic factors that will affect the number of people eligible for subsidized health insurance coverage under the ACA through Medicaid, CHIP, or the health insurance exchanges. In that forecast, the unemployment rate is higher throughout the projection period than it was in last year’s forecast. CBO also now estimates that wages and salaries will be lower than it previously anticipated.
    Those changes yield an increase in the projected number of people eligible for Medicaid and CHIP as a result of the ACA. They also yield a small reduction in the number projected to be eligible for subsidies for purchasing insurance through the exchanges. That reduction is the net effect of two changes resulting from the forecast of lower incomes: More people are now projected to be eligible for Medicaid or CHIP rather than for exchange subsidies, and at the same time, some people whose incomes were expected to be too high for them to be eligible for exchange subsidies are now projected to be eligible for them.

    So I guess if I use Mindless logic.
    Obamanomics has crippled this economy to such an extent that more of us will be eligable for Da
    Gubermint Insurance.
    And in Libtard land, this is a good thing.
    I am Now A LIB.
    Let It Burn!

  7. #37
    Member ILOVEDNY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, Tx.
    Posts
    4,943
    By RON JOHNSON
    One year after the passage of ObamaCare, this paper published an op-ed I wrote ("ObamaCare and Carey's Heart") about how America's health-care system saved my daughter's life, and describing how implementing this law will limit innovation, lead to rationing, and lower the quality of care. Now, two years out, I would like to focus on the budgetary disaster.

    As a candidate, Barack Obama repeatedly claimed that his health-care plan would lower annual family health-insurance premiums by $2,500 before the end of his first term as president. But the Kaiser Family Foundation recently reported that the average family premium has increased $2,200 since the start of this administration.

    Then there is the higher cost to taxpayers. The CBO's initial estimate in March 2010 of ObamaCare's budget impact showed it saving money, reducing the federal deficit by $143 billion in the first 10 years. But that positive estimate was largely the product of gimmicks inserted into the bill by Democratic leaders to hide the law's true cost.

    Sure enough, the administration last October announced it would not implement one of those gimmicks, a long-term care program called the Class Act, because it was financially unworkable. The loss of the premiums that would be collected to finance the Class Act wiped out $70 billion of the supposed deficit reduction projected by CBO. And last month the administration's proposed fiscal 2013 budget included $111 billion in additional spending for the premium subsidies in the health law's insurance exchanges—further eroding any confidence in the original ObamaCare projections.

    This would not be the first time a government program exceeded its projected cost. When Medicare was passed in 1965, for example, the federal government estimated it would cost $12 billion in 1990. Medicare actually cost $110 billion in 1990.

    In the case of ObamaCare, one of the principal sources of the lowball estimate used to justify the law is related to the insurance exchanges. The CBO originally estimated that one million Americans would lose their employer-sponsored care and be forced into the exchanges.

    But a McKinsey & Co. study in June 2011 showed that 30%-50% of employers plan to stop offering health insurance to their employees once the health law is implemented in 2014. Last week the CBO breezily dismissed this and other studies on the ground that "it is doubtful that any survey conducted today could provide very accurate predictions of employers' future decisions."

    As someone who purchased group health insurance for over 31 years, I fully understand why the McKinsey study is more credible than the CBO.

    Why? Because the decision employers face under ObamaCare is straightforward: Do they pay $20,000 per year for family coverage, or do they pay the $2,000 penalty to the government?

    It is not as if dropping health coverage will expose their employees to financial risk. They will thereby make employees eligible for huge subsidies in the health-care exchanges—$10,000 if their household income is $64,000 per year. In a competitive environment, ObamaCare provides the incentive for employers to drop coverage.

    According to the CBO, 154 million Americans are covered under employer-sponsored plans. What would be the cost to taxpayers if 50% of those individuals lost their coverage and became eligible for subsidies? The answer is difficult to calculate, but CBO's answer is basically: Don't worry, revenues will increase automatically to cover those costs (for example, employees' taxable incomes will increase when they lose employer-provided coverage).

    In reality, as government assumes a greater share of health-care costs, pressure to cut payments to providers will be enormous. Reduced government reimbursements to providers will cause massive cost-shifting to those remaining in the private health-insurance market. More employees will lose coverage. Before long, we will have what the left has long sought—a single payer health-care system modeled after Medicaid.

    In recent testimony before the Senate Appropriations Committee, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told me that America's health insurance system is in a "death spiral." She failed to acknowledge that implementation of ObamaCare will be the cause of that death spiral, and American taxpayers will be left to pick up the tab.

    In a June 2009 speech to the American Medical Association, Mr. Obama promised: "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." I'm not sure what you would call that statement, but whatever you call it, it was a doozy.

    Mr. Johnson, a Republican, is a senator from Wisconsin.
    I am Now A LIB.
    Let It Burn!

  8. #38
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    11,467
    We need to end our employer based HC system and must move to a private national plan that is funded via a sales tax.
    "I know you guys enjoy reading my stuff because it all makes sense. "

    Dumbest post ever! Thanks for the laugh PO!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Anyone remember?
    By sabres07 in forum Amherst, Clarence and Williamsville
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: November 5th, 2009, 11:39 PM
  2. Remember !!!
    By gonerail in forum Morning Breakfast - Breaking News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 21st, 2008, 08:48 PM
  3. remember this......
    By bigpoppapuff in forum Dog, Cat, Pets and Animal Care
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: May 3rd, 2008, 01:35 PM
  4. The Best You Can Remember.
    By |- Amherst Stakeholder -| in forum Amherst, Clarence and Williamsville
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: October 23rd, 2006, 10:37 PM
  5. Remember When . . . .
    By bflonum1fan in forum Morning Breakfast - Breaking News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: April 17th, 2006, 01:56 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts