Even as BO kept saying that over and over intelligent people kept saying that wasn't possible. Of course they were called racists Now even Huffpo is having to admit the truth and call what BO said stupid The Link Oh we are shocked to learn that according to a gov't study a bronze plan I the minimum) will cost a family of 4 20k a year, according to this CNBC link 2/3's may not even buy insurance The Link can anyone still where will the money come from to subsidize BO's failure
The money will come from the taxpayers who will not only be responsible enough to buy their own (now very expensive) insurance but will now pay for everyone else's, too. And anyone who ever thought otherwise is a fool.
right AB The thing is even the fools will have to fork over the 20K o not get insurance and pay the fines while gambling with their health and health of loved ones including children. when does the family become a priority over supporting a failed law? No one has said health insurance and care doesn't need an overhaul. Obama care has some good elements. However the crap and disastrous policies far outweigh any good. Would supporters be willing to admit this must be stopped as long as Congress goes back and works on reform?
VY I don't think Huffpo was saying BO was stupid. I think they were rightly pointing how what he kept saying was stupid and his way will hurt millions of people and cost perhaps cost hundreds of thousands of jobs. I am not sure how anyone thinking he got his was on this is a good thing and I am not sure his way will sustain in its current form
VYFan is right. The promise may have been stupid in the sense that it couldn't possibly be kept. However, the bill would never have passed without the promise. It doesn't really matter that the promise couldn't be kept. Nobody could conclusively establish that at the time it was made or prior to the 2012 election, and that's all that matters. Within ten years we'll have a single-payer system, and it'll happen with little opposition.
What you don't get or maybe just ignoring is that what he was saying was not stupid it was an outright lie. Obamacare is exactly what those who wrote it wanted, it is bad legislation that is going to force the Country to a single payer system. There is no doubt in my mind that this was the ultimate goal. Now I don't know if this was Obama's ultimate goal but if it wasn't then he really is clueless and allowing other's to use him to promote their agenda.
VY My error, sorry MrD There were enough people who had credibility pointing out what would happen and even more importantly there were enough people in Congress calling for more careful investigation that IF the MSM had any journalistic cajones they would have reported some of the questions and called for more study There was an much conclusive data to show the issues as there were blind STUPID promises Remember BO insulting Paul Ryan's study while Ryan set in front of BO? Did even one MSM call BO out for unpresidential behavior? I wonder now how people who thought this was a good idea really feel since they will be caught in the same trap and pay the same amount while losing whatever plan they have now that they may like or that suits their needs. even 5 years is a LONG time to pay that much if as you think single payer will come about
The sad sad truth is that this will hurt many people including Dems unless BO does the same thing he did for unions . It was sold to the American People as a way to lower health care costs. look at the title of the act now dems are saying well yes costs will rise but never mind Most of us knew what would happen, the supporters are the fools except we will all pay including the fools
Obamacare is a symptom, a response ----- however ill-conceived ----- to the reality that healthcare costs had risen an average of almost 13.0% per year over the course of the previous 20 years, far outpacing general inflation. Other than John Mackey, not too many people put forth a reasonable alternative, one that might have had the possibility of running the gauntlet and becoming law. And taxpayers have already been picking up the healthcare costs of the indigent and the poor.
BI, so because health care costs were high and there were no alternatives we had to pass a bill that no one had time to read and digest?
Just because the media didn't talk about other options doesn't mean there weren't any out there. There are organizations and experts out there lobbying (not technically) for other ways to reduce health care costs. Even evil GWB was implementing things to help. But you never heard of it or the people working on it. It wasn't written in shining letters on the TV, "AFFORDABLE CARE ACT", and lauded by people on the TV, "look at what these great leaders are doing, we have to pass it because the leaders are great and doing these benevolent things for us!" I can't remember the name of the person but I watched an interview 2-3 years ago of a guy who worked with GWB and state governments. They were working on market based approaches and healthcare account systems to help people get more for their money. It might not have been enough and Bush was probably doing other things to contradict these guys but it isn't true that there weren't options and that Republicans weren't working on things. They were. Sorry I can't quote the name.
BI, In all fairness, the GOP has proposed some legitimate reforms, including the expansion of MSAs, which I've always thought was a good idea, because it weans us off of health insurance. The idea of routinely paying for anything using a third party payer (whether it's insurance or government) is stupid and fundamentally unsound. However, it's a lose/lose issue for the GOP, because nobody is going to call what they're doing a real "reform" unless there's some kind of guarantee for those unable to afford health insurance. Well, that's not going to happen without government involvement and money, which is the opposite of what the GOP stands for (or at least claims to stand for).
Will we ever have tough enough, civic minded leaders, to deliver real health care reform? There are a lot of entrenched interests with soft spots in an enormously inefficient structure that is the American Health Care Industry. Folks who make a lot of money doing a little of nothing have a helluva a lot of money and energy to preserve structures that pour money into their wallets. Richard Young MD wrote, "To fully appreciate the efficiency of the British healthcare system consider this. As a percentage of the GDP, if the U.S. spent what it currently does on just public healthcare programs (Medicare, Medicaid, and state and local programs) but developed a healthcare system as efficient as the British, that amount of money would provide healthcare to every single American." (From American Health$care) You can find a lot of anecdotal evidence that the British (a single-payor system) causes inconvenience, rationing of care, etc., but statistically the outcomes are about as good as the enormously expensive system in the U.S.
we took a bad system, kept it but made it much more expensive because "doing something is better than doing nothing". Yeah, except when it isn't. BHO is a fcking menace.
Stating that a healthcare system is statistically the same even if you have to wait many months for care is simply false. If you lose your job because you waited months for surgery on your hernia, you did not come out "statistically" the same or better. Not to mention the other complications caused by your illness. The NHS in Britain is ripe with problems and dissatisfaction - not a model most insured Americans will be happy to have once ACA has destroyed the present system.
Somewhat true, but at a certain point, all good doctors will move to a cash basis concierge service as will private hospitals. Those without resources will wait in long lines at large county facilities with outdated equipment and medical students caring for them. You will see a steady decline in people choosing medicine as a career. We are already seeing that these intelligent people are choosing careers with better lifestyles and less crap from the government. Who can blame them?
I didn't say that the level of care would be the same, just with expanded access to health care outcomes would be statistically similar. All the good doctors won't leave the system no matter what the strucure. Like lots of bright people teach because they love the work and making a difference, a lot of good doctors aren't just all about the money. As an aside though, I did hear something disconcerting from a doctor and a medical student about to be a doctor. They say that the brightest, highest achieving students they go to college with are competing and aspiring for the limited number of openings in --- DERMATOLOGY --. Man I would hope that the best would want to be neorosgeons, heart-lung-liver transplant specialists, oncologists ....Apparantly the hours, the lack of stress and great income dispensing balms and lotions is really appealing
I believe Dermatology has long been a highly sought after discipline because of the practice environment and better reimbursement issues. GRANTED, reimbursement is not that their services are covered by many health plans, but that they have a larger percentage of cash paying customers. I am not a dermatologist, so one of the doctors can give a more accurate post. However, if you do think that plenty of top students will sign up for multiple years of school, hundreds of thousands in debt, with a very uncertain financial future, you are living in a dream land. Current doctors are closing their practices for better opportunities to have less risk and actually make money.
