If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Investors Business Daily)   Say, whatever happened to that bold and definitive promise Obama made to cut health premiums $2,500 by the "end of my first term"?   (news.investors.com) divider line 413
    More: Fail, obama, premiums, Kaiser, Kaiser Family Foundation  
•       •       •

1830 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Sep 2012 at 2:54 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



413 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-25 06:27:01 AM  
Republicans throwing hissy fits and screaming SOCIALISM every time he tried to do anything, were you not paying attention?
 
2012-09-25 06:35:18 AM  
Politicians make bold statements about how they'd control private market costs all the time.

The private market pretty quickly makes sure to screw them over, every time.
 
2012-09-25 06:39:30 AM  
It probably went to the same place where he promised to cut the deficit in half rather than double it.
 
2012-09-25 06:40:23 AM  
i51.tinypic.com
This happened. Oh, and I know I say this often, but fark you, retarded Kentucky voters.
 
2012-09-25 06:56:19 AM  
My opinion is that Lieberman farked us. No public option. That would have created real competition.
 
2012-09-25 07:11:04 AM  

johnryan51: My opinion is that Lieberman farked us. No public option. That would have created real competition.


It wasn't just Traitor Joe. Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Evan Bayh, whose wife prostituted...oh, um, that is, lobbied for WellPoint, weren't agreeing to anything until they got their snouts wet. There were plenty of greedy pigs who ruined the public option and single payer options.
 
2012-09-25 08:52:02 AM  

EnviroDude: It probably went to the same place where he promised to cut the deficit in half rather than double it.


He made no such promise, fool. There's plenty of reality based material to work with, you should try sticking to that.
 
2012-09-25 08:54:35 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: EnviroDude: It probably went to the same place where he promised to cut the deficit in half rather than double it.

He made no such promise, fool. There's plenty of reality based material to work with, you should try sticking to that.


Why would he start now?
 
2012-09-25 09:51:22 AM  
GOP-led filibuster, that's what happened.
 
2012-09-25 10:09:44 AM  
Heh, at this point, my vote for Obama has less to do with his undelivered promises and more to do with just how much farking worse it'd be with Romney. It's not a pleasant decision. But that's where we've come to as a country, it seems.
 
2012-09-25 10:25:55 AM  

Cythraul: Heh, at this point, my vote for Obama has less to do with his undelivered promises and more to do with just how much farking worse it'd be with Romney. It's not a pleasant decision. But that's where we've come to as a country, it seems.


Join me and throw your vote away for someone else. fark both of em.
 
2012-09-25 10:49:11 AM  

EnviroDude: It probably went to the same place where he promised to cut the deficit in half rather than double it.


How does going from 1.29T to 1.32T "double" ?

Or are you one of those people who thinks FY2009 didn't start in October of 08?
 
2012-09-25 10:50:25 AM  

cman: Cythraul: Heh, at this point, my vote for Obama has less to do with his undelivered promises and more to do with just how much farking worse it'd be with Romney. It's not a pleasant decision. But that's where we've come to as a country, it seems.

Join me and throw your vote away for someone else. fark both of em.


You do know that by voting for Gary Johnson, you're just helping the incumbent. I appreciate your support. Would you like a bumper sticker?
 
2012-09-25 11:05:16 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: cman: Cythraul: Heh, at this point, my vote for Obama has less to do with his undelivered promises and more to do with just how much farking worse it'd be with Romney. It's not a pleasant decision. But that's where we've come to as a country, it seems.

Join me and throw your vote away for someone else. fark both of em.

You do know that by voting for Gary Johnson, you're just helping the incumbent. I appreciate your support. Would you like a bumper sticker?


Be that as it may, at least I wont be walking out of the polling station pissed off
 
2012-09-25 11:28:32 AM  
A politician made a promise that he couldn't deliver on? I'm shocked.
 
2012-09-25 11:35:43 AM  
Oh, IBD, when will you just accept that minorities and women are Americans?
 
2012-09-25 11:37:17 AM  
He should be easy to beat in November then right? Right?
 
2012-09-25 11:41:03 AM  
Well, the GOP will definitely deliver on cutting our insurance premiums in half, once they get rid of Obamacare and replace it with everything that is in Obamacare, minus the name and the method to pay for it.

See, this is the problem. The GOP offers only horrible solutions to problems.
 
2012-09-25 11:46:53 AM  
So if what I am to gather from investors.com is that private for profit health insurance is too expensive?

Is their official stance being in support of single payer? Or are they supporting Mitt's "just go the the ER", or as the alternative would be, just die?
 
2012-09-25 11:49:58 AM  
Obama made promises for the first term? What promises?
 
2012-09-25 11:59:48 AM  
Let me summarize this thread:

Dems: bad things happen-Boo Republicans, good things happen- Yea Democrats

GOPers: bad things happen-Boo Democrats, good things happen- Yea Republicans

I really hate our polarized political process
 
2012-09-25 12:09:38 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: EnviroDude: It probably went to the same place where he promised to cut the deficit in half rather than double it.

How does going from 1.29T to 1.32T "double" ?

Or are you one of those people who thinks FY2009 didn't start in October of 08?


Many people do not understand that "deficit" and "debt", when it comes to economics, are not synonyms.
 
2012-09-25 12:15:26 PM  

mysticcat: Let me summarize this thread:

Dems: bad things happen-Boo Republicans, good things happen- Yea Democrats

GOPers: bad things happen-Boo Democrats, good things happen- Yea Republicans

I really hate our polarized political process


Well, the important thing is that you're better than us.
 
2012-09-25 12:20:36 PM  

Lando Lincoln: mysticcat: Let me summarize this thread:

Dems: bad things happen-Boo Republicans, good things happen- Yea Democrats

GOPers: bad things happen-Boo Democrats, good things happen- Yea Republicans

I really hate our polarized political process

Well, the important thing is that you're better than us.


Not better, just weary
 
2012-09-25 12:21:13 PM  

SlothB77: Obama made promises for the first term? What promises?


You know, it's not like you're new here. We know you've seen the list. Don't play dumb.
 
2012-09-25 12:21:15 PM  
The Freshman Congress and their sophomoric ideas.

www.realclearpolitics.com
 
2012-09-25 12:24:16 PM  

Lando Lincoln: SlothB77: Obama made promises for the first term? What promises?

You know, it's not like you're new here. We know you've seen the list. Don't play dumb.


funny how the liberal media forgets all those promises now that they have been broken.
 
2012-09-25 12:27:13 PM  

mysticcat: Let me summarize this thread:

Dems: bad things happen-Boo Republicans, good things happen- Yea Democrats

GOPers: bad things happen-Boo Democrats, good things happen- Yea Republicans

I really hate our polarized political process


It is a mistake to believe that other Democratic systems are not polarized, they just have more poles.

Furthermore, our political process has always been like this. Sure, at the moment what we lack are those few statesmen who could sit down with some whiskey and hammer out something in a back room that the junior legislators had to go by, but the US political process has only rarely not been polarized.
 
2012-09-25 12:32:30 PM  

cman: Cythraul: Heh, at this point, my vote for Obama has less to do with his undelivered promises and more to do with just how much farking worse it'd be with Romney. It's not a pleasant decision. But that's where we've come to as a country, it seems.

Join me and throw your vote away for someone else. fark both of em.


You're voting Republican. Stop lying.
 
2012-09-25 12:38:21 PM  

SlothB77: Lando Lincoln: SlothB77: Obama made promises for the first term? What promises?

You know, it's not like you're new here. We know you've seen the list. Don't play dumb.

funny how the liberal media forgets all those promises now that they have been broken.


So you REALLY want us to point to the website that tracks this stuff, and displays how Obama kept a lot more of his promises that he broke? You really want to go there? So you can ignore it again and bring it up next week?
 
2012-09-25 12:40:21 PM  

Confabulat: Republicans throwing hissy fits and screaming SOCIALISM every time he tried to do anything, were you not paying attention?



King Something: GOP-led filibuster, that's what happened.

 
2012-09-25 12:50:27 PM  

ghare: cman: Cythraul: Heh, at this point, my vote for Obama has less to do with his undelivered promises and more to do with just how much farking worse it'd be with Romney. It's not a pleasant decision. But that's where we've come to as a country, it seems.

Join me and throw your vote away for someone else. fark both of em.

You're voting Republican. Stop lying.


Yes, because for the past year or so, I could not shut up about my love for Mittens

/Sarcasm, folks
 
2012-09-25 01:28:46 PM  
To back that up, Obama pointed to a memo drafted by Harvard professors (and unpaid campaign advisers), which claimed that investing in health care IT, cutting administrative bloat, and improving management of chronic diseases would cut health costs by $140 billion a year. That would translate into $2,500 in premium savings for families.

I've been in IT for a long time, and while savings can sometime be had, it's mostly been an increasing cost sector for the companies I've worked for. Why? Because more IT tends to involve offering more services, which cost more money. Be wary of people claiming to save you boatloads of cash if you'll only deploy X. It frequently costs you more. That's not directed at Obama, it's more of a general criticism. "Experts" tend to inflate IT savings to astronomically unrealistic levels.
 
2012-09-25 01:38:33 PM  

Confabulat: Republicans throwing hissy fits and screaming SOCIALISM every time he tried to do anything, were you not paying attention?


Wasn't it a promise based on the Affordable Care Act...which in fact...passed.  Years ago in fact.
 
2012-09-25 01:56:12 PM  

Lsherm: To back that up, Obama pointed to a memo drafted by Harvard professors (and unpaid campaign advisers), which claimed that investing in health care IT, cutting administrative bloat, and improving management of chronic diseases would cut health costs by $140 billion a year. That would translate into $2,500 in premium savings for families.

I've been in IT for a long time, and while savings can sometime be had, it's mostly been an increasing cost sector for the companies I've worked for. Why? Because more IT tends to involve offering more services, which cost more money. Be wary of people claiming to save you boatloads of cash if you'll only deploy X. It frequently costs you more. That's not directed at Obama, it's more of a general criticism. "Experts" tend to inflate IT savings to astronomically unrealistic levels.


That's true, but the medical field seems to be stuck in the Dark Ages with their data handling.
 
2012-09-25 02:11:55 PM  

Lando Lincoln: Lsherm: To back that up, Obama pointed to a memo drafted by Harvard professors (and unpaid campaign advisers), which claimed that investing in health care IT, cutting administrative bloat, and improving management of chronic diseases would cut health costs by $140 billion a year. That would translate into $2,500 in premium savings for families.

I've been in IT for a long time, and while savings can sometime be had, it's mostly been an increasing cost sector for the companies I've worked for. Why? Because more IT tends to involve offering more services, which cost more money. Be wary of people claiming to save you boatloads of cash if you'll only deploy X. It frequently costs you more. That's not directed at Obama, it's more of a general criticism. "Experts" tend to inflate IT savings to astronomically unrealistic levels.

That's true, but the medical field seems to be stuck in the Dark Ages with their data handling.


It depends on a lot on the facility. If you have a ton of physical records, it's gonna take a while to digitize that in a meaningful way, while new patients can be handled that way from scratch. Not to mention it depends a lot on the type of practice and what their typical margins are like. My osteopath, for example, does everything with iPads now, but he has the profit margin to do so and a relatively small office to maintain. I imagine that if you're General Hospital of (city) you might be in a different spot with regards to that sort of thing.
 
2012-09-25 02:12:47 PM  

Lando Lincoln: That's true, but the medical field seems to be stuck in the Dark Ages with their data handling.


Indeed, but they'll probably end up duplicating all of the inefficiencies they have now into whatever new systems they set up (that's a gross generalization). It will take years to clean it all up, and those years will cost a fortune. I've seen it happen in education and larger state government agencies (like DMVs) - the first few years the costs go up and then finally level off or lower once everything is in place. For something as complicated as health records, it could take a decade or more before any money is saved at all. The infrastructure needs to be built, and while it's a sunk cost, it's still an expense.
 
2012-09-25 02:27:08 PM  

Lando Lincoln: Lsherm: I've been in IT for a long time, and while savings can sometime be had, it's mostly been an increasing cost sector for the companies I've worked for. Why? Because more IT tends to involve offering more services, which cost more money. Be wary of people claiming to save you boatloads of cash if you'll only deploy X. It frequently costs you more. That's not directed at Obama, it's more of a general criticism. "Experts" tend to inflate IT savings to astronomically unrealistic levels.

That's true, but the medical field seems to be stuck in the Dark Ages with their data handling.



Pretty much. Installing a new software package will often require more IT resources to support but it can often save money depending on how well it works and what service it provides...and sometimes how the company uses it. I have one client who has a specific department that will not use a large portion of our enterprise suite. They have a lab that employees 14-20 individuals and I know that their procedures, changed to work with our software, would reduce their workload to where it could be done by 3 people (I actually think it could be done by 1 but I have to account for other factors). They, of course, see this which is why they protect their data from everyone and scorn our software at every opportunity.

That's one of the many things I do as a programmer/PM - evaluate a business needs for clients and potential clients and look for the best way to save them money with the use of our software. From what I've seen in the medical community, there's a lot inefficiency and waste with respect to software and data handling.
 
2012-09-25 02:56:28 PM  
This is insane, I don't recall premiums rising prior to Obama taking office.
 
2012-09-25 02:58:20 PM  

I_C_Weener: Confabulat: Republicans throwing hissy fits and screaming SOCIALISM every time he tried to do anything, were you not paying attention?

Wasn't it a promise based on the Affordable Care Act...which in fact...passed.  Years ago in fact.


The majority of provisions don't go into effect till 2014. But you're just a disingenuous troll so there's that.
 
2012-09-25 03:00:45 PM  
He met up with a 200 foot tall solid brick wall of Republican Obstructionism?
 
2012-09-25 03:01:59 PM  
The same month he was elected HR told us premiums would keep going up.

I believed them.
 
2012-09-25 03:03:20 PM  

Lsherm: To back that up, Obama pointed to a memo drafted by Harvard professors (and unpaid campaign advisers), which claimed that investing in health care IT, cutting administrative bloat, and improving management of chronic diseases would cut health costs by $140 billion a year. That would translate into $2,500 in premium savings for families.

I've been in IT for a long time, and while savings can sometime be had, it's mostly been an increasing cost sector for the companies I've worked for. Why? Because more IT tends to involve offering more services, which cost more money. Be wary of people claiming to save you boatloads of cash if you'll only deploy X. It frequently costs you more. That's not directed at Obama, it's more of a general criticism. "Experts" tend to inflate IT savings to astronomically unrealistic levels.


Every sales person does that with every product.
 
2012-09-25 03:04:22 PM  

Lando Lincoln: Well, the GOP will definitely deliver on cutting our insurance premiums in half, once they get rid of Obamacare and replace it with everything that is in Obamacare, minus the name and the method to pay for it.

See, this is the problem. The GOP offers only horrible solutions to problems.


I'm pretty sure what they'll do, if they get the chance, is repeal the ACA, replace it with nothing, and kick the can down the road for x number of years.
 
2012-09-25 03:04:54 PM  
Obama fell short on many campaign promises. Luckily for him the right is running one of the worst campaigns I have ever seen.
 
2012-09-25 03:06:09 PM  

Raoul Eaton: Lando Lincoln: Well, the GOP will definitely deliver on cutting our insurance premiums in half, once they get rid of Obamacare and replace it with everything that is in Obamacare, minus the name and the method to pay for it.

See, this is the problem. The GOP offers only horrible solutions to problems.

I'm pretty sure what they'll do, if they get the chance, is repeal the ACA, replace it with nothing, and kick the can down the road for x number of years.


Hey those ER visits to pass on the costs will be far cheaper.
 
2012-09-25 03:08:50 PM  

jst3p: Obama fell short on many campaign promises.


I think that he's done as well as was physically possible. If you're taking an exam, some random idiot takes a diarrhoea dump right on your paper and eats your pencil, and you still manage to score 85%... That's still pretty damn good.
 
2012-09-25 03:10:33 PM  

I_Am_Weasel: So if what I am to gather from investors.com is that private for profit health insurance is too expensive?

Is their official stance being in support of single payer? Or are they supporting Mitt's "just go the the ER", or as the alternative would be, just die?


Or Israel's policy of government-mandated healthcare price controls, which Mitt Romney endorsed during his trip there?
 
2012-09-25 03:11:44 PM  
In a debate with Sen. John McCain, for example, Obama said "the only thing we're going to try to do is lower costs so that those cost savings are passed onto you. And we estimate we can cut the average family's premium by about $2,500 per year."

Oh, I see.

"Try"

"Estimate"

Nothing to see here, move on...
 
2012-09-25 03:13:59 PM  
Who cares? Pass the kool-aid. Mmm mmm mmm. Barak Hussein Obama
 
Displayed 50 of 413 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report