Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(American Enterprise Institute)   If you like your medicines, you can keep your.. what, you can't? Ah geez, not those too   ( aei.org) divider line
    More: Fail, American Made, Obamcare, HMOs, Poverty in the United States, Centers for Medicare  
•       •       •

1863 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Dec 2013 at 2:33 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-12-09 10:42:37 AM  
Oh bullshiat. fark AEI, they're chronically full of shiat.
 
2013-12-09 10:49:59 AM  
Well, the good news is that even if your plan will no longer cover some of your medications, they can't charge you that $5 co-pay for birth control anymore. Or charge your wife if, you know, you're a guy.
 
2013-12-09 10:55:42 AM  
AEI?

i42.tinypic.com
 
2013-12-09 11:01:36 AM  
I guess no one's going to rebut any of the specific points in the article? I am rather curious about it.
 
2013-12-09 11:09:40 AM  

Nabb1: I guess no one's going to rebut any of the specific points in the article? I am rather curious about it.


What's to rebut? Panicked headline that isn't supported by facts? Bullshiat fear-mongering using vague statements?

Typical AEI bullshiat.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-12-09 11:46:14 AM  
I figured it would be bullshiat as soon as I saw AEI.  Even before I realized that medications are prescribed by dostors and not by insurance.

Basically, the article claims that some drugs aren't covered and that there are co-pays as though the sort of crappy individual plans that Obamacare was designed to replace don't have copays and cover drugs that Obamacare plans don't.
 
2013-12-09 11:53:34 AM  

vpb: I figured it would be bullshiat as soon as I saw AEI.  Even before I realized that medications are prescribed by dostors and not by insurance.

Basically, the article claims that some drugs aren't covered and that there are co-pays as though the sort of crappy individual plans that Obamacare was designed to replace don't have copays and cover drugs that Obamacare plans don't.


I'm sure Fox News will find someone who will take a bottle of Mad Dog in exchange for telling the world his old insurance plan, which cost $20 a month, covered every drug ever made. If they can't, I'll have no reason at all to believe this story describes a real problem.
 
2013-12-09 12:01:56 PM  

Nabb1: I guess no one's going to rebut any of the specific points in the article? I am rather curious about it.


OK, fine.  Here is the central argument of the article:

Simply put, many drugs may not be covered at all, and the costs patients incur by buying them with cash wont count against out of pocket caps.

First, this is pure unadulterated speculation many drugs MAY not be covered?  Which drugs?  Are they currently covered by comparable plans in the individual market?

Second, who cares that drug expenses won't count against out of pocket caps?  That's true of most plans (group and individual) today.  And the author ignores the central point that "out of pocket caps" themselves are REQUIRED by the ACA, and that many pre-ACA individual plans had no out-of-pocket caps at all.

So, yeah, it's horseshiat, as expected.
 
2013-12-09 01:16:15 PM  
Since the Affordable Care Act was enacted, more than 7.3 million seniors and people with disabilities have saved $8.9 billion on their prescription drugs, an average of $1,209 per person since 2010. Link

Tyranny, tyranny.
 
2013-12-09 01:49:27 PM  
So, how is the "some drugs are covered while others aren't" any different pre and post ACA? This seems like at worst a problem the ACA didn't fix, as opposed to one created by the ACA.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-12-09 01:54:59 PM  

nmrsnr: So, how is the "some drugs are covered while others aren't" any different pre and post ACA? This seems like at worst a problem the ACA didn't fix, as opposed to one created by the ACA.


A major tactic has been complaining about co-pays and things not being covered as though those are unique to Obamacare policies and not to all insurance.

I am sure the people the articles are aimed at are ignorant enough to assume that.
 
2013-12-09 02:00:45 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Since the Affordable Care Act was enacted, more than 7.3 million seniors and people with disabilities have saved $8.9 billion on their prescription drugs, an average of $1,209 per person since 2010. Link

Tyranny, tyranny.


yeah, but I can't keep my $50/month, doesn't shiat, "insurance" plan, so Obama is a filthly, lying, ni' and we need to impeach him and repeal Obamacare and make Mittford J. Romney President for life.
 
2013-12-09 02:05:44 PM  

ManateeGag: Dusk-You-n-Me: Since the Affordable Care Act was enacted, more than 7.3 million seniors and people with disabilities have saved $8.9 billion on their prescription drugs, an average of $1,209 per person since 2010. Link

Tyranny, tyranny.

yeah, but I can't keep my $50/month, doesn't shiat, "insurance" plan, so Obama is a filthly, lying, ni' and we need to impeach him and repeal Obamacare and make Mittford J. Romney President for life.


oh, and your link is nothing buy big government propeganda!  we need real patriot websites like Daily Caller or Breitbart.com to tell us truth.
 
2013-12-09 02:10:46 PM  
You'd have to honestly believe that "Obamacare" is some sort of all encompassing umbrella insurance company to not want to donkeypunch pretty much most of the media at this point.
 
2013-12-09 02:34:53 PM  
Rebut the points in the article?

I believe this was authored by Boy who previously authored "Wolf: Crap Your Pants in Fear".
 
2013-12-09 02:35:52 PM  

El_Perro: That's true of most plans (group and individual) today.


That statement can be used on EVERY SINGLE COMPLAINT AGAINST OBAMACARE THESE RIDICULOUS shiatS HAVE MADE.
 
2013-12-09 02:37:25 PM  
My sinuses have been conjested for about a week now.  Thanks Obama!
 
2013-12-09 02:38:25 PM  
Learn to swear like an adult when you troll, subby.  fark.
 
2013-12-09 02:39:55 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Since the Affordable Care Act was enacted, more than 7.3 million seniors and people with disabilities have saved $8.9 billion on their prescription drugs, an average of $1,209 per person since 2010. Link

Tyranny, tyranny.


But but but that was on the whitehouse.gov website!  That's like visiting muggle.net for a serious critique of the Harry Potter movies!

//or so the dodecahedron-shaped potato rolleth.
 
2013-12-09 02:40:19 PM  

nmrsnr: So, how is the "some drugs are covered while others aren't" any different pre and post ACA? This seems like at worst a problem the ACA didn't fix, as opposed to one created by the ACA.


WOUDL YOU LIKE TO REBUT ANY OF THE POINTS IN TFA AND FURTHERMORE FART NOISES
 
2013-12-09 02:41:32 PM  

Nabb1: I guess no one's going to rebut any of the specific points in the article?


next rebut the specific points of this article:
www.dogdoo.com
 
2013-12-09 02:42:02 PM  
I think what they're saying is under the ACA your drug formulary is going to change whether you want it to or not. That means some drugs that were covered won't be and some drugs that weren't covered will be unless your drug formulary is exactly the same as what the ACA requires. The gripe is, your drug formulary is changing without any control by you. I think the marjority of the gripes about ACA boil down to the same thing, changes being forced on you that you have no control over. Humans don't like to feel out of control, this is why people are much more nervous about flying rather than driving a car even though the stats say flying is much safer.
 
2013-12-09 02:42:58 PM  
Prescription drugs are not apart of your insurance.  They are their own thing.  Your plan may have combined them for you, but they were never meant to be put together.

My wife has had to switch birth control pills like 4 times in the last 10 years and she has employer provided insurance thru a commercial bank.

If she had private market insurance, I can't imagine how bad she would have been farked over.
 
2013-12-09 02:43:11 PM  
I really wanted to keep using the drug that my doctor prescribed me that costs $2000 a dose, instead of the cheaper alternative that he didn't tell me about that costs $50 per dose.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/12/tea-party-rep-likes-was te ful-government.html
 
2013-12-09 02:43:29 PM  
What kind of libbo crap is this?  I only read The Heritage Foundation.
 
2013-12-09 02:44:00 PM  

chasd00: The gripe is, your drug formulary is changing without any control by you. I think the marjority of the gripes about ACA boil down to the same thing, changes being forced on you that you have no control over.


Because we had such input into the formulary drugs of private insurance before the ACA. We had lots of recourse and plenty of choices for those formularies. Obamacare is restricting us.
 
2013-12-09 02:45:35 PM  

Bloody William: chasd00: The gripe is, your drug formulary is changing without any control by you. I think the marjority of the gripes about ACA boil down to the same thing, changes being forced on you that you have no control over.

Because we had such input into the formulary drugs of private insurance before the ACA. We had lots of recourse and plenty of choices for those formularies. Obamacare is restricting us.


I totally didI I totally, completely did! I could choose the one Aetna chose for me or I could eat shiat. And now the shiat-eating option is off the table! Thanks, Obama.
 
2013-12-09 02:49:06 PM  

Bloody William: chasd00: The gripe is, your drug formulary is changing without any control by you. I think the marjority of the gripes about ACA boil down to the same thing, changes being forced on you that you have no control over.

Because we had such input into the formulary drugs of private insurance before the ACA. We had lots of recourse and plenty of choices for those formularies. Obamacare is restricting us.


I understand your point but humans don't like change either. Folks are use to their insurance and now it's changing ( for better or for worse on a case by case basis ) whether they want it to or not. Most people are just fine with tomorrow being just like today because today was just like yesterday. At the very least, if there is a change they want to be in control of it.
 
2013-12-09 02:50:30 PM  

chasd00: I think what they're saying is under the ACA your drug formulary is going to change whether you want it to or not. That means some drugs that were covered won't be and some drugs that weren't covered will be unless your drug formulary is exactly the same as what the ACA requires. The gripe is, your drug formulary is changing without any control by you. I think the marjority of the gripes about ACA boil down to the same thing, changes being forced on you that you have no control over. Humans don't like to feel out of control, this is why people are much more nervous about flying rather than driving a car even though the stats say flying is much safer.


Which it did, every year, prior to the ACA.  ALL insurance formularys changed year to year, dropping some, adjusting others, and adding new ones.  I have never been asked for my opinion about that by BCBS, United Healthcare, or Aetna prior to the changes.

So, non-story, pretty much made up bullshiat story.
 
2013-12-09 02:51:21 PM  

chasd00: Bloody William: chasd00: The gripe is, your drug formulary is changing without any control by you. I think the marjority of the gripes about ACA boil down to the same thing, changes being forced on you that you have no control over.

Because we had such input into the formulary drugs of private insurance before the ACA. We had lots of recourse and plenty of choices for those formularies. Obamacare is restricting us.

I understand your point but humans don't like change either. Folks are use to their insurance and now it's changing ( for better or for worse on a case by case basis ) whether they want it to or not. Most people are just fine with tomorrow being just like today because today was just like yesterday. At the very least, if there is a change they want to be in control of it.


I'm not knocking the ACA, i couldn't really care less about it,  it's just a fact of life. People don't want to change and the especially don't like being out of control of changes affecting them.
 
2013-12-09 02:52:33 PM  

Satan's Bunny Slippers: chasd00: I think what they're saying is under the ACA your drug formulary is going to change whether you want it to or not. That means some drugs that were covered won't be and some drugs that weren't covered will be unless your drug formulary is exactly the same as what the ACA requires. The gripe is, your drug formulary is changing without any control by you. I think the marjority of the gripes about ACA boil down to the same thing, changes being forced on you that you have no control over. Humans don't like to feel out of control, this is why people are much more nervous about flying rather than driving a car even though the stats say flying is much safer.

Which it did, every year, prior to the ACA.  ALL insurance formularys changed year to year, dropping some, adjusting others, and adding new ones.  I have never been asked for my opinion about that by BCBS, United Healthcare, or Aetna prior to the changes.

So, non-story, pretty much made up bullshiat story.


mine never changed. :shrug: but whatever, this argument or whatever it is isn't worth the energy required to display the characters on everyone's monitors...
 
2013-12-09 02:53:18 PM  

chasd00: Bloody William: chasd00: The gripe is, your drug formulary is changing without any control by you. I think the marjority of the gripes about ACA boil down to the same thing, changes being forced on you that you have no control over.

Because we had such input into the formulary drugs of private insurance before the ACA. We had lots of recourse and plenty of choices for those formularies. Obamacare is restricting us.

I understand your point but humans don't like change either. Folks are use to their insurance and now it's changing ( for better or for worse on a case by case basis ) whether they want it to or not. Most people are just fine with tomorrow being just like today because today was just like yesterday. At the very least, if there is a change they want to be in control of it.


This seriously makes no sense.  So, humans don't like change.  Yay them.  This 'change' is not new, is not a surprise, and is no different from the 'changes' they've experienced before.

They should stop reading shiat like this 'news article' if they want to avoid news of change, ignoring everything, life goes on tra la la.

But I also respectfully disagree with you on your basic point.  People are not fearful of this because "change".  Idiots are fearful of this because faux news and things like it told them the scary nibong is wrecking their lives.
 
2013-12-09 02:53:27 PM  
Throw in the fact that you used to be able to deduct for medical anything after 7.5% of your gross adjusted income was changed this year to 10%
Thanks IRS
 
2013-12-09 02:54:11 PM  
chasd00:

mine never changed. :shrug: but whatever, this argument or whatever it is isn't worth the energy required to display the characters on everyone's monitors...

Just out of curiosity....how long have you had insurance?
 
2013-12-09 02:55:30 PM  

chasd00: I understand your point but humans don't like change either. Folks are use to their insurance and now it's changing ( for better or for worse on a case by case basis ) whether they want it to or not. Most people are just fine with tomorrow being just like today because today was just like yesterday. At the very least, if there is a change they want to be in control of it.


Just because it can be psychologically explained as an illogical reaction doesn't mean it's remotely valid on any level.
 
2013-12-09 02:57:34 PM  
So, are you all saying tag is for subby, or tag is for source?
 
2013-12-09 03:00:06 PM  

chasd00: I think the marjority of the gripes about ACA boil down to the same thing, changes being forced on you that you have no control over.


...meanwhile, their old plans are the exact same as the day they got them 20 years ago!
 
2013-12-09 03:01:40 PM  

a_bilge_monkey: So, are you all saying tag is for subby, or tag is for source?


static.fjcdn.com
 
2013-12-09 03:03:26 PM  

IlGreven: chasd00: I think the marjority of the gripes about ACA boil down to the same thing, changes being forced on you that you have no control over.

...meanwhile, their old plans are the exact same as the day they got them 20 years ago!


Yes, their insurance plans were just DRIPPING with control before the ACA. Damn you Changebama
 
2013-12-09 03:04:41 PM  
HuffPo posted/warned about this back in May.
 
2013-12-09 03:07:14 PM  

dr_blasto: Nabb1: I guess no one's going to rebut any of the specific points in the article? I am rather curious about it.

What's to rebut? Panicked headline that isn't supported by facts? Bullshiat fear-mongering using vague statements?

Typical AEI bullshiat.


Ever notice how, when challenged to employ facts instead of invective, lefties frequently resort to the tautological? It's always long the lines of, "I don't have to prove you're wrong because YOU'RE WRONG!"
 
2013-12-09 03:12:08 PM  

Southern100: HuffPo posted/warned about this back in May.


From your link: "Although the money for covering uninsured Americans is coming from Washington, the heath care law gives states broad leeway to tailor benefits, and the local approach can also allow disparities to emerge."

So lack of federal regulation is a bad thing now? The government should have had stricter rules about how states should run their insurance programs? Is that the Conservative position on this?
 
2013-12-09 03:14:28 PM  

jjorsett: dr_blasto: Nabb1: I guess no one's going to rebut any of the specific points in the article? I am rather curious about it.

What's to rebut? Panicked headline that isn't supported by facts? Bullshiat fear-mongering using vague statements?

Typical AEI bullshiat.

Ever notice how, when challenged to employ facts instead of invective, lefties frequently resort to the tautological? It's always long the lines of, "I don't have to prove you're wrong because YOU'RE WRONG!"


Existing in a cultural vacuum based on the idea that every statement is equally valid and must be treated as absolute truth until dissected must be rough.
 
2013-12-09 03:18:17 PM  

nmrsnr: Southern100: HuffPo posted/warned about this back in May.

From your link: "Although the money for covering uninsured Americans is coming from Washington, the heath care law gives states broad leeway to tailor benefits, and the local approach can also allow disparities to emerge."

So lack of federal regulation is a bad thing now? The government should have had stricter rules about how states should run their insurance programs? Is that the Conservative position on this?


I think the benefits should be the same in all 50 states, yes. Where you live should not have a dramatic impact on drug costs.

But then, I'm all for single-payer -- except that presents a whole NEW set of problems. :-/
 
2013-12-09 03:19:51 PM  

Satan's Bunny Slippers: chasd00: I think what they're saying is under the ACA your drug formulary is going to change whether you want it to or not. That means some drugs that were covered won't be and some drugs that weren't covered will be unless your drug formulary is exactly the same as what the ACA requires. The gripe is, your drug formulary is changing without any control by you. I think the marjority of the gripes about ACA boil down to the same thing, changes being forced on you that you have no control over. Humans don't like to feel out of control, this is why people are much more nervous about flying rather than driving a car even though the stats say flying is much safer.

Which it did, every year, prior to the ACA.  ALL insurance formularys changed year to year, dropping some, adjusting others, and adding new ones.  I have never been asked for my opinion about that by BCBS, United Healthcare, or Aetna prior to the changes.

So, non-story, pretty much made up bullshiat story.


Well, they already were able to convince a huge chunk of the media that "you can keep your doctor" is a lie because there is nothing requiring your insurance company to keep your doctor in-network, so "if you like your medicine you can keep it" is equally a lie since there is nothing in the healthcare bill requiring your insurance company to keep the same formulary. Oh, and I also love the "maybe your other costs other than your medication will be more expensive next year leading you to forgo refilling it to cover other bills, that would totally make getting to keep your medications a lie too!"
 
2013-12-09 03:20:03 PM  

jjorsett: dr_blasto: Nabb1: I guess no one's going to rebut any of the specific points in the article? I am rather curious about it.

What's to rebut? Panicked headline that isn't supported by facts? Bullshiat fear-mongering using vague statements?

Typical AEI bullshiat.

Ever notice how, when challenged to employ facts instead of invective, lefties frequently resort to the tautological? It's always long the lines of, "I don't have to prove you're wrong because YOU'RE WRONG!"


Ever notice how, when confronted by the fact that the organization you're supporting is completely biased and therefore any study of theirs is by its very nature biased, you decide to continue to shill for that organization?

Give me a link from a news organization - not another Heritage Foundation knock-off.  Then we'll talk (about how brown are your hash browns, lover of all things 'potato').
 
2013-12-09 03:21:52 PM  

jjorsett: dr_blasto: Nabb1: I guess no one's going to rebut any of the specific points in the article? I am rather curious about it.

What's to rebut? Panicked headline that isn't supported by facts? Bullshiat fear-mongering using vague statements?

Typical AEI bullshiat.

Ever notice how, when challenged to employ facts instead of invective, lefties frequently resort to the tautological? It's always long the lines of, "I don't have to prove you're wrong because YOU'RE WRONG!"


Ever notice that conservatives tend to ignore the posts where a liberal explains, with facts, why an article is wrong, and instead jump right to complaining about someone else?

And how often they make broad generalizations when complaining about liberals making broad generalizations?
 
2013-12-09 03:27:32 PM  

Grungehamster: Satan's Bunny Slippers: chasd00: I think what they're saying is under the ACA your drug formulary is going to change whether you want it to or not. That means some drugs that were covered won't be and some drugs that weren't covered will be unless your drug formulary is exactly the same as what the ACA requires. The gripe is, your drug formulary is changing without any control by you. I think the marjority of the gripes about ACA boil down to the same thing, changes being forced on you that you have no control over. Humans don't like to feel out of control, this is why people are much more nervous about flying rather than driving a car even though the stats say flying is much safer.

Which it did, every year, prior to the ACA.  ALL insurance formularys changed year to year, dropping some, adjusting others, and adding new ones.  I have never been asked for my opinion about that by BCBS, United Healthcare, or Aetna prior to the changes.

So, non-story, pretty much made up bullshiat story.

Well, they already were able to convince a huge chunk of the media that "you can keep your doctor" is a lie because there is nothing requiring your insurance company to keep your doctor in-network, so "if you like your medicine you can keep it" is equally a lie since there is nothing in the healthcare bill requiring your insurance company to keep the same formulary. Oh, and I also love the "maybe your other costs other than your medication will be more expensive next year leading you to forgo refilling it to cover other bills, that would totally make getting to keep your medications a lie too!"


*sigh*  I know, I know.

I just wished for single payer.  I'm certain it won't happen with any success in my lifetime, by best estimates I've got ~35 years left, give or take, barring any unexpected illness that would enact the OBAMA DEATH PANELS.
 
2013-12-09 03:30:58 PM  

jjorsett: Ever notice how, when challenged to employ facts instead of invective, lefties frequently resort to the tautological? It's always long the lines of, "I don't have to prove you're wrong because YOU'RE WRONG!"


coeyagi: Ever notice how, when confronted by the fact that the organization you're supporting is completely biased and therefore any study of theirs is by its very nature biased, you decide to continue to shill for that organization?


grumpfuff: Ever notice that conservatives tend to ignore the posts where a liberal explains, with facts, why an article is wrong, and instead jump right to complaining about someone else?


I read all of these in Andy Rooney's voice.

Ever notice how, if you cover a bulldog's ears, they all look like Ed Asner?
 
2013-12-09 03:31:01 PM  

coeyagi: jjorsett: dr_blasto: Nabb1: I guess no one's going to rebut any of the specific points in the article? I am rather curious about it.

What's to rebut? Panicked headline that isn't supported by facts? Bullshiat fear-mongering using vague statements?

Typical AEI bullshiat.

Ever notice how, when challenged to employ facts instead of invective, lefties frequently resort to the tautological? It's always long the lines of, "I don't have to prove you're wrong because YOU'RE WRONG!"

Ever notice how, when confronted by the fact that the organization you're supporting is completely biased and therefore any study of theirs is by its very nature biased, you decide to continue to shill for that organization?

Give me a link from a news organization - not another Heritage Foundation knock-off.  Then we'll talk (about how brown are your hash browns, lover of all things 'potato').


Only problem is, most news organizations won't post "bad news" about anything Obama related. Or when they do, they bury it in a back page somewhere and the only way you can even find it is with a site: google search.
 
Displayed 50 of 93 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  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