Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-17-2014, 12:09 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,176,592 times
Reputation: 7875

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by VTHokieFan View Post
How does providing affordable insurance provide affordable healthcare?
That is a whole different topic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-17-2014, 01:14 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,617,602 times
Reputation: 18521
Quote:
Originally Posted by borregokid View Post
Lot of reasons for people to impeach Obama...

I never thought I'd hear you say that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2014, 11:09 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,117,467 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Opposition didn't matter. If you recall Obamacare passed with not one single Republican vote.
The Dems had both the House and Senate and did this without any Republican votes.

They could have made Obamacare into anything they wanted because they had the numbers to pass a bill no matter what it contained.

Baucus is the "insurance guy" my friend. And the WH worked directly with big pharma making them promises on their drugs.

Obamacare is 100% Dem owned.
We have a checks and balance system, so lets stop pretending the democrats (who aren't one singular group) could pass whatever. Hindsight will tell you large legislation, like ACA, takes a few years to become fully enacted. In those few years, how many times has ACA been put up to be repealed? Do you far righters actually believe universal healthcare would have survived when the tea baggers had a moment of actual relevance, not just being the party of opposition and no viable ideas?

Universal healthcare care, like all major legislative overhauls, requires bipartisan support.... ACA is the result when people become scared of phoney boogiemen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2014, 04:22 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,006 posts, read 44,813,405 times
Reputation: 13707
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
We have a checks and balance system, so lets stop pretending the democrats (who aren't one singular group) could pass whatever. Hindsight will tell you large legislation, like ACA, takes a few years to become fully enacted. In those few years, how many times has ACA been put up to be repealed? Do you far righters actually believe universal healthcare would have survived when the tea baggers had a moment of actual relevance, not just being the party of opposition and no viable ideas?

Universal healthcare care, like all major legislative overhauls, requires bipartisan support.... ACA is the result when people become scared of phoney boogiemen.
It also requires regressive taxes to pay for it:



Other countries don’t have a "47%" - Washington Post

There's no way the very small percentage who are taxed heavily here in the U.S. (only the top 5% pay a higher share of the federal income tax than their share of the income) can pay for everyone's health care.

(Note to moderators: all images appearing in this post have been linked via HTML text command in a legally permissible manner per the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Perfect 10 v. Amazon ruling, and as such do not constitute copyright violation.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2014, 05:01 AM
 
3,599 posts, read 6,783,260 times
Reputation: 1461
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
We have a checks and balance system, so lets stop pretending the democrats (who aren't one singular group) could pass whatever. Hindsight will tell you large legislation, like ACA, takes a few years to become fully enacted. In those few years, how many times has ACA been put up to be repealed? Do you far righters actually believe universal healthcare would have survived when the tea baggers had a moment of actual relevance, not just being the party of opposition and no viable ideas?

Universal healthcare care, like all major legislative overhauls, requires bipartisan support.... ACA is the result when people become scared of phoney boogiemen.
U really believe the ACA would have been passed if Obama would have told the truth:

1. That in order to cut costs there would be narrow networks because many insurers who participate will low ball providers and hospitals so that limits many patients choices who sign up for the exchanges

2. That the 30-40% who already have individual coverage are expected to pay "full price" which results in 40-50% increase in premiums without any significant perks in their policies or face doubling of their deductibles in order to maintain the same premiums

3. That really at most 1-2 million Americans will benefit from "pre existing conditions" who are on the individual market. Since all govt insurance and most people with private employer insurance were already able to get insurance with pre existing insurance

4. That of the medicaid expansion isn't "forever" and the government isn't guaranteed to keep picking up the tab for the states. Or else they would have kept the "cornhusker kickback" and applied it to every state.

Bottom line is the ACA's major parts only took effect on Jan 1st 2014. And there is a very good reason why. It was simply to protect Obama's 2012 re election. If the real truth would have come out. I can tell you this. He wouldn't have won by 5 million votes. The election would have been much closer especially in the swing states
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2014, 12:35 PM
 
8,016 posts, read 5,858,077 times
Reputation: 9682
Quote:
Originally Posted by aneftp View Post
U really believe the ACA would have been passed if Obama would have told the truth:

1. That in order to cut costs there would be narrow networks because many insurers who participate will low ball providers and hospitals so that limits many patients choices who sign up for the exchanges

2. That the 30-40% who already have individual coverage are expected to pay "full price" which results in 40-50% increase in premiums without any significant perks in their policies or face doubling of their deductibles in order to maintain the same premiums

3. That really at most 1-2 million Americans will benefit from "pre existing conditions" who are on the individual market. Since all govt insurance and most people with private employer insurance were already able to get insurance with pre existing insurance

4. That of the medicaid expansion isn't "forever" and the government isn't guaranteed to keep picking up the tab for the states. Or else they would have kept the "cornhusker kickback" and applied it to every state.

Bottom line is the ACA's major parts only took effect on Jan 1st 2014. And there is a very good reason why. It was simply to protect Obama's 2012 re election. If the real truth would have come out. I can tell you this. He wouldn't have won by 5 million votes. The election would have been much closer especially in the swing states

Yes, I could not agree more with you. If Obama had actually told the truth about Obamacare, I don't think he would have been re-elected. Admittedly, there are a lot of low-information types in the pool these days, but they would have likely been able to see what a mess Obamacare was.

But Barack Obama has likely been a pathological liar his entire life, dating all the way back to when he told his classmates that his dad was the fiercest of warriors from a village full or warriors. I guess that's more meaningful than telling the kids the TRUTH, which would have sounded like "my dad is a serial inseminator who impregnated my mom when he was married to someone else. Oh,yeah, and then he drank himself to death."

Baroke Obama even lied about the details surrounding his own mother's death in order to continue the narrative with Obamacare. So it was a given that the fine people of Oregon likely did not know exactly what they were signing up for. Sure, a huge number of them won't pay, and an even larger number won't renew their insurance, either.

Obamacare -- and not just in Oregon -- is at best a house of cards. The government doesn't do anything with any efficiency, and this is no exception.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2014, 01:39 PM
 
Location: Oceania
8,610 posts, read 7,893,401 times
Reputation: 8318
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Opposition didn't matter. If you recall Obamacare passed with not one single Republican vote.
The Dems had both the House and Senate and did this without any Republican votes.

They could have made Obamacare into anything they wanted because they had the numbers to pass a bill no matter what it contained.

Baucus is the "insurance guy" my friend. And the WH worked directly with big pharma making them promises on their drugs.

Obamacare is 100% Dem owned.
Does any believe any in government penned the bill? Who truly believes Obama knew the full bill front to back before pitching it? Pelosi's big outh said it best..."We have to pass it to find out what's in it".

It was lobbyists for AMA, insurance and pharma companies who wrote that as it is them it serves best. The AMA is going to suffer in the future while insurance and pharma profits as oil companies do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2014, 02:02 PM
 
1,696 posts, read 1,714,640 times
Reputation: 1450
Once again, Pelosi meant that the bill had to pass *the committee* before the House or the Senate knew what the committee had put in the bill.

She never meant that it had to pass both Houses first.

But I know it doesn't matter how many times this is explained...the Right loves a lie.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 09:22 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,101,577 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
yes, the 30 million that still are without is because the republicans shot down any attempt for universal healthcare, which is why i think aca doesn't go far enough.
lie
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 09:24 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,101,577 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Yes, some conservative Democrats were against it as well, which is why it didn't make it, which is a shame because it would have covered everyone. Americans always lose when conservatives play politics.
So you admit the Democratic plan was a failure.. Thanks for finally telling us you've been wrong for all of these years..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:13 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top