FAIL tag is for subby's butthurt because most of America voted Obama back into office and supports his policies.

You lost get over it.

DamnYankees: Yeah, that's totally what he said and not at all a selective quote.

And we're done.

Subby is so butthurt, it made him illiterate.

It's times like these, Subby, you should ask yourself what Jesus would do.  Then, do the exact opposite because that's more patriotically correct.

It's a shame that Preparation H doesn't some in an Industrial Strength.

The only cure for butthurt as severe as this author's is to sever his spinal cord above the L5 vertebrae.

You's trollin'!

Has it started to kill people yet?
//See Michelle Bachmann quote

FlashHarry: funny, 'cause i always thought "obamacare" was a republican idea.

Too early for denial and revisionist history. Do come back in 10 years or so.

So we need to switch to single payer then.

Right?

FlashHarry: Nabb1: FlashHarry: funny, 'cause i always thought "obamacare" was a republican idea.

That's not very reassuring.  Quite the opposite, come to think of it.

well, the individual mandate - the part that everybody hates.


Please. Republicans love individual mandates, as long as the stranger in the stall isn't an undercover cop.

Learn to read subby

Marcus Aurelius: So we need to switch to single payer then.

Right?

Honestly, if this doesn't work, we need to head straight to Universal.

DamnYankees: Yeah, that's totally what he said and not at all a selective quote.

It's not even an accurate quote.  Subby must work for FOX.

It's not that farking complicated, idiots.

1)Healthcare exchanges are set up to broker insurance packages. this needs to happen becuase insurance carriers and medicare disbursers all have their heads up theirasses and use non-standardised billing for each state

2) you either get insurance from an exchange, get it from work, or pay a diminous tax penalty to continue to abuse the system

3) everyone gets to pick their own doctor iiregardless of what the carrier says.

4) SMBs are essentially off the hook for healthcare. they're free- they either buy lower cost care plans than before or pay nothing or an again, diminous penalty compared to what insurance actually costs.

5) essentially nothing changes for the larger enterprise and the vast majority of the people they cover.

was that so hard?

I think it's going to be a disaster. It was rushed through and is monstrously complex, and govt projections are very frequently overly optimistic.

I'm not in medical care so I can't argue for certain, but I'll make an admittedly non-expert prediction that it will cost alot more than expected, and when it does democrats will not be willing to cut benefits or subsidies, but rather ask the rich to pay "a little bit more" to pay for the cost, whining that it would be unfair to cut subsidies or coverage.

Debeo Summa Credo: I think it's going to be a disaster. It was rushed through and is monstrously complex, and govt projections are very frequently overly optimistic.

I'm not in medical care so I can't argue for certain, but I'll make an admittedly non-expert prediction that it will cost alot more than expected, and when it does democrats will not be willing to cut benefits or subsidies, but rather ask the rich to pay "a little bit more" to pay for the cost, whining that it would be unfair to cut subsidies or coverage.

plus death panels

Yes, I agree the heritage foundation is in no sense a reasonable source of good healthcare policy.

Marcus Aurelius: So we need to switch to single payer then.

Right?

Nonsense. At least consider the public option first, then decide between the two. Otherwise, make like you're not gonna show your tits.

CPennypacker: Debeo Summa Credo: I think it's going to be a disaster. It was rushed through and is monstrously complex, and govt projections are very frequently overly optimistic.

I'm not in medical care so I can't argue for certain, but I'll make an admittedly non-expert prediction that it will cost alot more than expected, and when it does democrats will not be willing to cut benefits or subsidies, but rather ask the rich to pay "a little bit more" to pay for the cost, whining that it would be unfair to cut subsidies or coverage.

plus death panels

Nope, already had those before the passing of the ACA (see the high levels of rescission which insurance companies engaged in years past).

Debeo Summa Credo: I think it's going to be a disaster. It was rushed through and is monstrously complex, and govt projections are very frequently overly optimistic.

I'm not in medical care so I can't argue for certain, but I'll make an admittedly non-expert prediction that it will cost alot more than expected, and when it does democrats will not be willing to cut benefits or subsidies, but rather ask the rich to pay "a little bit more" to pay for the cost, whining that it would be unfair to cut subsidies or coverage.


But will it be worse than the ongoing disaster that's been the norm for the past few years?

One thing conservatives & liberals* can agree on: the way we pay for health care in this country was really screwed up, and even after the ACA, it's still screwed up.

They tend to disagree about what to do about it, though.


*I may be working with a biased sample of conservatives and liberals here.

You know what wouldn't be complicated?

Medicare for all or some other form of single payer universal healthcare.

Debeo Summa Credo: I think it's going to be a disaster.

I'm not in medical care.

All I needed to hear.

FlashHarry: Nabb1: FlashHarry: funny, 'cause i always thought "obamacare" was a republican idea.

That's not very reassuring.  Quite the opposite, come to think of it.

well, the individual mandate - the part that everybody hates.

its obvious they hate their ideas... ideas in general probably..

AurizenDarkstar: CPennypacker: Debeo Summa Credo: I think it's going to be a disaster. It was rushed through and is monstrously complex, and govt projections are very frequently overly optimistic.

I'm not in medical care so I can't argue for certain, but I'll make an admittedly non-expert prediction that it will cost alot more than expected, and when it does democrats will not be willing to cut benefits or subsidies, but rather ask the rich to pay "a little bit more" to pay for the cost, whining that it would be unfair to cut subsidies or coverage.

plus death panels

Nope, already had those before the passing of the ACA (see the high levels of rescission which insurance companies engaged in years past).

Thanks for the link.

In 2010, it was revealed that WellPoint specifically targeted women with breast cancer for aggressive investigation with the intent to cancel (rescind) their policies. The disclosures followed the discovery that Assurant Health similarly targeted all recently-diagnosed HIV-positive (AIDS) policyholders for rescission.

I have to wonder if the people involved just accepted the fact that they're evil? Twirling their mustaches as they screwed over sick people for money?

JolobinSmokin: You know what wouldn't be complicated?

Medicare for all or some other form of single payer universal healthcare.

Yup.  Pretty much this is the only real way to get the national costs of healthcare under control in the US.

But between the insurance companies having to give up their subsidies and profits, coupled with people having issues with paying anything more in taxes (which would be needed to fund national Medicare or single payer), and it would take a lot to ever get it off the ground in this day & age.

What's amazing is, we've been setting up nationalized healthcare programs for countries outside the US, but can't be bothered to do it for our own citizens.  Screwed up, ain't it?

draypresct: Debeo Summa Credo: I think it's going to be a disaster. It was rushed through and is monstrously complex, and govt projections are very frequently overly optimistic.

I'm not in medical care so I can't argue for certain, but I'll make an admittedly non-expert prediction that it will cost alot more than expected, and when it does democrats will not be willing to cut benefits or subsidies, but rather ask the rich to pay "a little bit more" to pay for the cost, whining that it would be unfair to cut subsidies or coverage.


But will it be worse than the ongoing disaster that's been the norm for the past few years?

One thing conservatives & liberals* can agree on: the way we pay for health care in this country was really screwed up, and even after the ACA, it's still screwed up.

They tend to disagree about what to do about it, though.


*I may be working with a biased sample of conservatives and liberals here.

Worse in which sense?

Some more people will have coverage, for a little while anyway.
Cost of care will rise.
The insurance industry will make out like bandits and be even more powerful when thizls fight is fought again in ~15years.

Also, some unforeseen consequences.

I would call it worse than the old system, but its not as if there are no positives.

draypresct: AurizenDarkstar: CPennypacker: Debeo Summa Credo: I think it's going to be a disaster. It was rushed through and is monstrously complex, and govt projections are very frequently overly optimistic.

I'm not in medical care so I can't argue for certain, but I'll make an admittedly non-expert prediction that it will cost alot more than expected, and when it does democrats will not be willing to cut benefits or subsidies, but rather ask the rich to pay "a little bit more" to pay for the cost, whining that it would be unfair to cut subsidies or coverage.

plus death panels

Nope, already had those before the passing of the ACA (see the high levels of rescission which insurance companies engaged in years past).

Thanks for the link.

In 2010, it was revealed that WellPoint specifically targeted women with breast cancer for aggressive investigation with the intent to cancel (rescind) their policies. The disclosures followed the discovery that Assurant Health similarly targeted all recently-diagnosed HIV-positive (AIDS) policyholders for rescission.

I have to wonder if the people involved just accepted the fact that they're evil? Twirling their mustaches as they screwed over sick people for money?

It also helped that the people responsible to finding reasons to throw people off of their insurance were getting huge bonuses from their employers for the number of people whose policies were cancelled.  Money always tends to be a great motivator.

stoli n coke: FlashHarry: Nabb1: FlashHarry: funny, 'cause i always thought "obamacare" was a republican idea.

That's not very reassuring.  Quite the opposite, come to think of it.

well, the individual mandate - the part that everybody hates.


Please. Republicans love individual mandates, as long as the stranger in the stall isn't an undercover cop.

What you did there was seen and enjoyed.

You are a moron if you think "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it" means that Congress just had 10,000 monkeys banging away at keyboards until a bill with words resembling the English language came out.  They worked on it for months.  The quote really means "We have to pass one version of the bill so you jagwagons will stop lying about what is in it".