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.
"Greg Sargent writes The Plum Line blog, a reported opinion blog with a liberal slant -- what you might call “opinionated reporting” from the left."
His 'liberal slant' left out every bad poll result, such as 32% say their health insurance is getting worse under Ocare, only 8% say it's getting better.
You are young, healthy and really only need coverage if you are run over by a truck (which in that case) you'll either be dead or sue the person who ran you over and make a fortune
Kind of a no brainer of why the young aren't signing up, and everyone knows Congress knew that.
They were just looking for an excuse to stick it to the late 40-50 somethings before they tell them they aren't eligible for Medicare when they turn 65 because it is broke.
And you take the Middle and upper income families who's kids are in college (or not) will be covered by their parents Insurance until they are 26.
The under 26 coverage by Parents is IMO a huge factor in failing to get the money youth signed up.
And you take the Middle and upper income families who's kids are in college (or not) will be covered by their parents Insurance until they are 26.
The under 26 coverage by Parents is IMO a huge factor in failing to get the money youth signed up.
The Bill hurts itself.
The purpose of the bill was to get people insured, not to guarantee a profit for insurers. Whether they remain on their parents plan or buy insurance for themselves, the goal of having them insured is met.
Unfortunately, what became the ACA was originally envisioned by the Heritage Foundation as a means to stop national health insurance and to guarantee the role and profitability of the insurance industry in US healthcare. So, it does take good care of the insurers no matter what happens. We do get more people insured one way or another, but it is very inefficient, onerous, and expensive. We will all pay for it in high rates and increased taxes. It is nothing but more corporate welfare disguised as a program to promote the public good.
And you take the Middle and upper income families who's kids are in college (or not) will be covered by their parents Insurance until they are 26.
The under 26 coverage by Parents is IMO a huge factor in failing to get the money youth signed up.
The Bill hurts itself.
Maybe when he does the photo-op with Moms at the White House today he'll tell them to drop under 26's from family coverage and give them Christmas Holiday $$$$$ for a policy of their own.
The purpose of the bill was to get people insured, not to guarantee a profit for insurers. Whether they remain on their parents plan or buy insurance for themselves, the goal of having them insured is met.
Unfortunately, what became the ACA was originally envisioned by the Heritage Foundation as a means to stop national health insurance and to guarantee the role and profitability of the insurance industry in US healthcare. So, it does take good care of the insurers no matter what happens. We do get more people insured one way or another, but it is very inefficient, onerous, and expensive. We will all pay for it in high rates and increased taxes. It is nothing but more corporate welfare disguised as a program to promote the public good.
Blaming Obamacare on the Heritage Foundation instead of Obama and the Democrats is partisan political hackery.
Politically, Obama wants to avoid a bailout of insurers or at least keep the amount low. So, it matters a lot how the uninsured get insured or health care.
The purpose of the bill was to get people insured, not to guarantee a profit for insurers. Whether they remain on their parents plan or buy insurance for themselves, the goal of having them insured is met.
Unfortunately, what became the ACA was originally envisioned by the Heritage Foundation as a means to stop national health insurance and to guarantee the role and profitability of the insurance industry in US healthcare. So, it does take good care of the insurers no matter what happens. We do get more people insured one way or another, but it is very inefficient, onerous, and expensive. We will all pay for it in high rates and increased taxes. It is nothing but more corporate welfare disguised as a program to promote the public good.
People who could once afford insurance will no longer be able to. Of those who can they will have to take money they would have spent in turn helping the economy, instead taking that money to buy insurance. It's not only a downward spiral of healthcare, it's a downward spiral for America. Did you notice every time government say they are trying to help the poor they end up causing more problems and even more people become poor?
Now you get it. Obamacare is both corporate and low income welfare. Lots of holes in it so the political elite can be on the take (on both sides). So erroneous that lawyers will get rich.
Ten words from Obamacare, that could spell doom for Obamacare: "“through an Exchange established by the State under Section 1311”
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.
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.
