Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No it isn't. As we've seen it's a mess and it's doing exactly what I said would happen. Yes there would be great resistance now because people know how poorly Obamacare was handled. The government is telling people that they are not capable of doing something like this.
They needed to either do it right or not at all. This was all doomed when despite knowing what sunk Hillary's attempt, Reid and Pelosi decided to do this behind closed doors. People are not going to ever accept that. Candidate Obama said everyone would sit down, hash it out, debate it and place it on the internet for all to see before it was voted on. That was all thrown out. If he had done that he wouldn't have lost the Senate. Yes that process would have taken a long time, but why shouldn't it?
The court is going to rule against it in Halbig and then it really starts to fall apart. Delays, exclusions and lies is what we got with Obamacare. We will not get what we should have for many years now because nobody is going to trust current leadership but people will continue to defend them and argue against actual *change*.
The ACA is not the first time health care reform was proposed. Roosevelt, LBJ, Ted Kennedy, Nixon, Clinton, and Obama have all tried to reform our system, but all met staunch resistance for the most part in the form of the AMA, insurance industry, and conservative politicians. Therefore, Obama proposing any reform that would dislodge our employer-sponsored health care model in favor of a single-payer one would be unfeasible.
I'm curious as to why you think the Senate would've passed the bill in its original form. With CBO's enrollment and projected outlay figures, I fail to see how the ACA is a mess. While you are right in that public opinion of ACA is unfavorable, Pew Research suggests that misconceptions about ACA and its mandate are the significant causes of this disfavor. Consider the following:
"But less than half of the general public is aware that the law eliminates out-of-pocket costs for preventive services or closes the so-called Medicare prescription drug “donut hole,” (a coverage gap that occurs after the beneficiary and his or her drug plan have exceeded a certain amount for covered drugs).
The Kaiser survey also found lingering misconceptions among the public about what the law does. Nearly half (46%) incorrectly believes the subsidies to help buy insurance is available to undocumented immigrants while 34% say the law establishes a government panel to make decisions about end-of-life care for those on Medicare."
The 2013 proposed alternative version of ACA, that was backed up by Republican House members, wanted to limit the role of federal government involvement in health care and make further use of private plans. Early this year, the SGR repeal proposal, which would delay the 5-year penalty for not obtaining insurance, was estimated to cost $138 billion more than the current formula by CBO. Again, I don't see how Republicans would've supported any reform that hinted at a single-payer system, for they seem to be more interested in scrapping ACA than fixing it.
I am all for a single-payer system, but until congress can rise above partisan politics, we won't see any real change in our lifetimes.
The ACA is not the first time health care reform was proposed. Roosevelt, LBJ, Ted Kennedy, Nixon, Clinton, and Obama have all tried to reform our system, but all met staunch resistance for the most part in the form of the AMA, insurance industry, and conservative politicians. Therefore, Obama proposing any reform that would dislodge our employer-sponsored health care model in favor of a single-payer one would be unfeasible.
Then don't bother. If we are not interested in doing it right, doing it wrong is never going to work. Never. As we are seeing.
Quote:
I'm curious as to why you think the Senate would've passed the bill in its original form. With CBO's enrollment and projected outlay figures, I fail to see how the ACA is a mess. While you are right in that public opinion of ACA is unfavorable, Pew Research suggests that misconceptions about ACA and its mandate are the significant causes of this disfavor. Consider the following:
In its' original form? What are you talking about?
Quote:
"But less than half of the general public is aware that the law eliminates out-of-pocket costs for preventive services or closes the so-called Medicare prescription drug “donut hole,†(a coverage gap that occurs after the beneficiary and his or her drug plan have exceeded a certain amount for covered drugs).
The Kaiser survey also found lingering misconceptions among the public about what the law does. Nearly half (46%) incorrectly believes the subsidies to help buy insurance is available to undocumented immigrants while 34% say the law establishes a government panel to make decisions about end-of-life care for those on Medicare."
We are indeed going to make end of life decisions. Trying to parse words to make this sound like anything but a failure is a waste of time.
Quote:
The 2013 proposed alternative version of ACA, that was backed up by Republican House members, wanted to limit the role of federal government involvement in health care and make further use of private plans. Early this year, the SGR repeal proposal, which would delay the 5-year penalty for not obtaining insurance, was estimated to cost $138 billion more than the current formula by CBO. Again, I don't see how Republicans would've supported any reform that hinted at a single-payer system, for they seem to be more interested in scrapping ACA than fixing it.
I am all for a single-payer system, but until congress can rise above partisan politics, we won't see any real change in our lifetimes.
That isn't their fault. It's ours. Obama lies "if you like your policy you can keep it" and look at the numbers who defend it. "If you like your doctor you can keep them". Lying to us is never going to fly. All we need is a politician willing to be truthful.
Bottom line is this. "Birth Control" (it's really about abortion) is NOT a Right. So please stop saying that it is. Secondly what this really boils down to is abortion, Hobby Lobby already covers real birth control, the only thing it doesn't cover is abortion or abortion contraceptives. If I were a business owner and you were trying to force me to pay for your abortions, something that I believe to be murder, against my very will, is the ultimate force of Tyranny! I will NOT pay to kill another human being, stop with the lies, stop saying "they're forcing their religion blah blah blah!" Really? How so? Are they making their employees wear crosses? Convert to Christianity? Go to Church? No. Therefore, they are not forcing anything on anyone. They have not taken away any woman's Rights. The only thing they DON'T do is pay for you to kill another person. Stop with the lies! Stop with the spin! I thought liberals were "pro-choice?" Guess they're only "pro-choice" when it comes to murder! What about a business owner's choice? Where is the "pro-choice" for them?
"If you tell a lie enough times, people will start to believe it"-Joseph Gobbels. Nazi Prime Minister of Propaganda
Indeed he was right, there are MANY lies being told here and MANY people are falling for them. If you don't stand with Hobby Lobby you are standing with Tyranny and you are now an outright enemy in my book.
I am all for a single-payer system, but until congress can rise above partisan politics, we won't see any real change in our lifetimes.
You're looking at an 19% increase to the existing FICA plus an additional consumption tax plus the existing Fed money given to states now for health insurance.
I don't think the majority of Americans and companies can easily pay that extra money.
Vermont is going single payer in 2017 and that is what they are considering now...11% employer/8% employee increase to FICA plus an additional state consumption tax. And that may still not be enough;
You're looking at an 19% increase to the existing FICA plus an additional consumption tax plus the existing Fed money given to states now for health insurance.
Not if we bring our soldiers home and quit giving away billions to Pakistan, Israel, Iraq, etc
Then don't bother. If we are not interested in doing it right, doing it wrong is never going to work. Never. As we are seeing.
Do you believe the old system was better than the current one? If so, what is your take on the CBO enrollment and projected outlay figures?
Personally, I would rather have incremental positive change than sweeping proposals that will never make it past congress.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
In its' original form? What are you talking about?
My mistake, I misread a portion of your post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
We are indeed going to make end of life decisions. Trying to parse words to make this sound like anything but a failure is a waste of time.
What do you mean? The ACA originally had a provision for end-of-life counseling, not decisions. Either way, this was dropped by the administration in 2011.
I'm not parsing words, I merely don't understand why you think public opinion (some of which is misguided) is the primary determinant for the success or failure of ACA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
That isn't their fault. It's ours. Obama lies "if you like your policy you can keep it" and look at the numbers who defend it. "If you like your doctor you can keep them". Lying to us is never going to fly. All we need is a politician willing to be truthful.
Citizens are able to keep their existing policies, but they must meet the minimum standards set by the ACA (which aren't very demanding) by 2017. More importantly, states were largely given the power to handle this issue. With the high dissatisfaction and turnover of bare-bones policies, I'm at a loss as to why you think this is a bad thing in principle.
The doctor/hospital issue is not the fault of Obama, but of the insurance companies who theorize that the exchange system will be overloaded with the sick.
Not if we bring our soldiers home and quit giving away billions to Pakistan, Israel, Iraq, etc
Single payer is just that..YOU pay.
What do you think will fund this..the Fed printing money ?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.