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.

(Forbes)   The administration has lawlessly rewritten Obamacare rules so that insurance companies are being bribed not to raise rates too much   (forbes.com) divider line 39
    More: Interesting, White House, health insurance, Bury, salvage  
•       •       •

717 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Jul 2014 at 1:44 PM (28 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



39 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-07-15 10:23:25 AM  
Oh, for fark's sake. Risk corridors were written into the law, and there are good reasons for them.
 
2014-07-15 10:43:57 AM  
Why does the right continually confuse 'executing the law' with 'OMG IMPEACH HIM FOR IGNORING THE CONSTITUTION'??

You  do know that even brown people are obligated to enact and enforce the laws as written by Congress, right? And that Congress deliberately writes those laws with a lot of leeway for Presidential flexibility in said enactment and enforcement? That interpretation is part of the intent?
 
2014-07-15 10:46:41 AM  
GUEST POST WRITTEN BY by Tim Phillips
Tim Phillips is the President of Americans for Prosperity.


Forbes. Hey Forbes. Your bias is showing. No not that one. The other one...ahh f*ck it.

administration has lawlessly rewritten Obamacare without letting the American people know

I guess if you use this word enough it becomes true? This is your standard brainwashing propaganda technique.
 
2014-07-15 11:24:14 AM  
lh4.googleusercontent.com

And this is the real fear. The elimination of what amounts to legalized gambling, with peoples' lives and a lot of jobs in the center. Single payer is the eventual end game, and the insurance companies realize this, and they are going to do their level best to stop it.
 
2014-07-15 11:25:40 AM  
Actually, the law makers wrote it that way. But, with this and the law suit over letting businesses delay the mandate, the party that "supports business" is being remarkably unsupportive.
 
2014-07-15 11:59:27 AM  

whistleridge: Why does the right continually confuse 'executing the law' with 'OMG IMPEACH HIM FOR IGNORING THE CONSTITUTION'??


Because Fox, duh...
 
2014-07-15 01:28:06 PM  
We'll never get tired of saying it, but there are more than a few things wrong with Obamacare. It so amazes me that the right insists on making up so many more things that aren't. It's like they're professional liars or something.
 
2014-07-15 01:29:18 PM  
The math is rather simple. If insurers have to cover more types of medications/services, as well as millions of new customers who already have chronic illnesses for whom you can't increase rates, you have to raise rates if you want to remain profitable.
 
2014-07-15 01:32:09 PM  
www.sparksflydesign.com www.whataboutwatermelon.com
www.sparksflydesign.com www.zogdo.com
 
2014-07-15 01:32:50 PM  
Ooops, wrong thread
 
2014-07-15 01:35:25 PM  

ArkAngel: Ooops, wrong thread


....meh, it fits.
 
2014-07-15 01:39:59 PM  
This must be that free market in health care everyone is talking about.
 
2014-07-15 01:42:43 PM  
TFA is about as accurate as Rick Santelli on CNBC.  Which is to say not at all.
 
2014-07-15 01:45:06 PM  

ArkAngel: Ooops, wrong thread


Does Obamacare cover that last one?
 
2014-07-15 01:48:10 PM  
How about we reform the inflated cost of healthcare in this country?

Naw, let's flail around like children eating gummy bears
 
2014-07-15 01:48:59 PM  
Buried in these new documents is a totally new thing that I'm totally sure wasn't already a target for repeal when "death spiral" was the Luntz of the week.
 
2014-07-15 01:50:13 PM  
Look, this is what happens when government gets involved.  They write a bill that causes health care rates to go up.  Unnecessarily.  Then they ask insurance companies to keep rates artificially low; below market value for political purposes (2014 mid-terms).  Then they promise to reimburse insurers for their losses.

What this does is

A) make insurers completely dependent and at the mercy of government to operate
B) reduce the ability of insurers to predict and respond to market forces, as those forces have been perversed by government intrusion.  year-over-year enrollment percentages and prices are no longer reliable and representative.  Basically, there is no transparency in the marketplace.  the whole market can change on a whim by a bureaucrat.
C) reduce the incentives for insurers to cut costs and operate at maximum efficiency: "the government is just gonna bail us out at the end of the year anyways!"  See the finance industry for how that turns out.
D) reduce the incentives for insurers to offer optimal products consumers want at the best possible prices.  Government determines the services and prices now, based on political motives.
E) so insurers have no incentive to innovate, offer new and better products and services
F) so the industry stagnates
G) and consumers end up suffering the most from this
H) and insurers know they will be bailed out by government, so they will take on much more risk than they were willing to assume, leading to spiraling debt which will then have to be bailed out by taxpayers
I) costing Americans more in the end than if Obamacare had never existed.

it is all very predictable.
 
2014-07-15 01:52:46 PM  

ArkAngel: [www.sparksflydesign.com image 412x600] [www.whataboutwatermelon.com image 330x346]
[www.sparksflydesign.com image 850x721] [www.zogdo.com image 850x815]


Death Panel Summerfest is gonna be great this year!
 
2014-07-15 01:56:29 PM  

ArkAngel: The math is rather simple. If insurers have to cover more types of medications/services, as well as millions of new customers who already have chronic illnesses for whom you can't increase rates, you have to raise rates if you want to remain profitable.


Good thing companies like Kaiser and BCBS are non-profits, then.
 
2014-07-15 01:57:12 PM  
Avik Roy?

**click**

Damn. I was wrong. Though Americans for Prosperity is not too far off.
 
2014-07-15 01:59:42 PM  
Just a little while ago rates were supposed to go through the roof.  Now they're being paid to be kept low.  I wonder if different things will happen to different rates because this country is farking huge and there are many insurance companies offering policies in many different markets?

Nah.
 
2014-07-15 02:03:19 PM  
If I'm an insurer putting my Obamacare plan on the government marketplace website, right next to all the other insurers and their Obamacare plans on the website, I'm going to make damn sure that my plan is the least expensive plan on the website, in the hopes that I can attract people to my insurance company by being the lowest priced plan on the website, even if I lose some money over the year, in the hopes that I keep those new customers when it comes time to renew their insurance policies.  Not only that, once I had those new customers, I would work relentlessly with medical care providers to cut our costs so that I can continue to offer the lowest priced Obamacare plans in the future.  This is called competition, and it is how we expect prices in a capitalistic system to be kept low.
 
2014-07-15 02:03:53 PM  

whistleridge: Why does the right continually confuse 'executing the law' with 'OMG IMPEACH HIM FOR IGNORING THE CONSTITUTION'??

You  do know that even brown people are obligated to enact and enforce the laws as written by Congress, right? And that Congress deliberately writes those laws with a lot of leeway for Presidential flexibility in said enactment and enforcement? That interpretation is part of the intent?


I'm getting a law suit ready to sue the police departments around here for not enforcing the speed limit against me when I've driven past officers at 5+ over.
 
2014-07-15 02:05:05 PM  

Soup4Bonnie: Just a little while ago rates were supposed to go through the roof.  Now they're being paid to be kept low.  I wonder if different things will happen to different rates because this country is farking huge and there are many insurance companies offering policies in many different markets?

Nah.


Yah.

Premium hikes will likely be modest in much of the country. But probably not everywhere.
- Larry Levitt, Kaiser Family Foundation
 
2014-07-15 02:19:31 PM  

incendi: Oh, for fark's sake. Risk corridors were written into the law, and there are good reasons for them.


Yeah, but who cares about those good reasons? All we really need is one reason to oppose it, and it's in the freaking name of Obamacare!
 
2014-07-15 02:20:35 PM  

Serious Black: Avik Roy?

**click**

Damn. I was wrong. Though Americans for Prosperity is not too far off.


I was going to say, what is so demanding of Avik Roy's time that he can't even write his own articles anymore? Busy working on the Republican alternative?
 
2014-07-15 02:24:37 PM  

Arkanaut: Serious Black: Avik Roy?

**click**

Damn. I was wrong. Though Americans for Prosperity is not too far off.

I was going to say, what is so demanding of Avik Roy's time that he can't even write his own articles anymore? Busy working on the Republican alternative?


I don't know how that could keep him so busy when the official Republican alternative so far is just to abolish Obamacare and reinstate the legal environment prior to 2010.
 
2014-07-15 02:56:20 PM  

ArkAngel: The math is rather simple. If insurers have to cover more types of medications/services, as well as millions of new customers who already have chronic illnesses for whom you can't increase rates, you have to raise rates if you want to remain profitable.


Or I dunno, maybe sign up millions of healthy customers who wern't in the system before?
 
2014-07-15 03:03:15 PM  

SlothB77: Look, this is what happens when government gets involved.  They write a bill that causes health care rates to go up.  Unnecessarily.  Then they ask insurance companies to keep rates artificially low; below market value for political purposes (2014 mid-terms).  Then they promise to reimburse insurers for their losses.

What this does is

A) make insurers completely dependent and at the mercy of government to operate
B) reduce the ability of insurers to predict and respond to market forces, as those forces have been perversed by government intrusion.  year-over-year enrollment percentages and prices are no longer reliable and representative.  Basically, there is no transparency in the marketplace.  the whole market can change on a whim by a bureaucrat.
C) reduce the incentives for insurers to cut costs and operate at maximum efficiency: "the government is just gonna bail us out at the end of the year anyways!"  See the finance industry for how that turns out.
D) reduce the incentives for insurers to offer optimal products consumers want at the best possible prices.  Government determines the services and prices now, based on political motives.
E) so insurers have no incentive to innovate, offer new and better products and services
F) so the industry stagnates
G) and consumers end up suffering the most from this
H) and insurers know they will be bailed out by government, so they will take on much more risk than they were willing to assume, leading to spiraling debt which will then have to be bailed out by taxpayers
I) costing Americans more in the end than if Obamacare had never existed.

it is all very predictable.


What orifice were these predictions pulled from?
 
2014-07-15 04:09:09 PM  

RyogaM: If I'm an insurer putting my Obamacare plan on the government marketplace website, right next to all the other insurers and their Obamacare plans on the website, I'm going to make damn sure that my plan is the least expensive plan on the website, in the hopes that I can attract people to my insurance company by being the lowest priced plan on the website, even if I lose some money over the year, in the hopes that I keep those new customers when it comes time to renew their insurance policies.  Not only that, once I had those new customers, I would work relentlessly with medical care providers to cut our costs so that I can continue to offer the lowest priced Obamacare plans in the future.  This is called competition, and it is how we expect prices in a capitalistic system to be kept low.


Nuh uh.  Because government.  Now, if this exact same process were run entirely by private businesses in space where THERE IS NO GOVERNMENT, magic pixie dust would make health insurance inexpensive and it would cover everything, including happy endings.
 
2014-07-15 04:15:18 PM  

SlothB77: Look, this is what happens when government gets involved.  They write a bill that causes health care rates to go up.  Unnecessarily.  Then they ask insurance companies to keep rates artificially low; below market value for political purposes (2014 mid-terms).  Then they promise to reimburse insurers for their losses.

What this does is

A) make insurers completely dependent and at the mercy of government to operate
B) reduce the ability of insurers to predict and respond to market forces, as those forces have been perversed by government intrusion.  year-over-year enrollment percentages and prices are no longer reliable and representative.  Basically, there is no transparency in the marketplace.  the whole market can change on a whim by a bureaucrat.
C) reduce the incentives for insurers to cut costs and operate at maximum efficiency: "the government is just gonna bail us out at the end of the year anyways!"  See the finance industry for how that turns out.
D) reduce the incentives for insurers to offer optimal products consumers want at the best possible prices.  Government determines the services and prices now, based on political motives.
E) so insurers have no incentive to innovate, offer new and better products and services
F) so the industry stagnates
G) and consumers end up suffering the most from this
H) and insurers know they will be bailed out by government, so they will take on much more risk than they were willing to assume, leading to spiraling debt which will then have to be bailed out by taxpayers
I) costing Americans more in the end than if Obamacare had never existed.

it is all very predictable.


as is a post like that coming from your account.
 
2014-07-15 06:01:14 PM  

ArkAngel: The math is rather simple. If insurers have to cover more types of medications/services, as well as millions of new customers who already have chronic illnesses for whom you can't increase rates, you have to raise rates if you want to remain profitable.


You mean that all the goodies handed out to Obama's Free Sh*t Army aren't actually free? Who knew?

The people who eagerly take from other people are disgusting, reprehensible human beings. The people who applaud and advocate for even more of this kind of behavior are a cancer in the asshole of humanity, and the world would be better off if they all died.
 
2014-07-15 06:20:11 PM  

Phinn: ArkAngel: The math is rather simple. If insurers have to cover more types of medications/services, as well as millions of new customers who already have chronic illnesses for whom you can't increase rates, you have to raise rates if you want to remain profitable.

You mean that all the goodies handed out to Obama's Free Sh*t Army aren't actually free? Who knew?

The people who eagerly take from other people are disgusting, reprehensible human beings. The people who applaud and advocate for even more of this kind of behavior are a cancer in the asshole of humanity, and the world would be better off if they all died.


Everybody who has a job is a disgusting, reprehensible human being?
 
2014-07-15 06:34:39 PM  

Serious Black: Phinn: ArkAngel: The math is rather simple. If insurers have to cover more types of medications/services, as well as millions of new customers who already have chronic illnesses for whom you can't increase rates, you have to raise rates if you want to remain profitable.

You mean that all the goodies handed out to Obama's Free Sh*t Army aren't actually free? Who knew?

The people who eagerly take from other people are disgusting, reprehensible human beings. The people who applaud and advocate for even more of this kind of behavior are a cancer in the asshole of humanity, and the world would be better off if they all died.

Everybody who has a job is a disgusting, reprehensible human being?


No, Einstein, employment is a mutually voluntary trade, not an example of taking.
 
2014-07-15 09:49:18 PM  

hubiestubert: [lh4.googleusercontent.com image 640x512]

And this is the real fear. The elimination of what amounts to legalized gambling, with peoples' lives and a lot of jobs in the center. Single payer is the eventual end game, and the insurance companies realize this, and they are going to do their level best to stop it.


Perhaps we should ridicule them with references to buggy whips?
 
2014-07-16 07:19:55 AM  
Phinn:

The people who eagerly take from other people are disgusting, reprehensible human beings. The people who applaud and advocate for even more of this kind of behavior are a cancer in the asshole of humanity, and the world would be better off if they all died.

www.habitatforhorses.org
Disgusting, reprehensible

cloudfront.mediamatters.org
Cancer in the asshole of humanity.
 
2014-07-16 12:54:53 PM  

Phinn: ArkAngel: The math is rather simple. If insurers have to cover more types of medications/services, as well as millions of new customers who already have chronic illnesses for whom you can't increase rates, you have to raise rates if you want to remain profitable.

You mean that all the goodies handed out to Obama's Free Sh*t Army aren't actually free? Who knew?

The people who eagerly take from other people are disgusting, reprehensible human beings. The people who applaud and advocate for even more of this kind of behavior are a cancer in the asshole of humanity, and the world would be better off if they all died.


Well, if anyone knows the inner workings of the asshole of humanity, it would be you.
 
2014-07-16 01:02:54 PM  
This thread is filled with the Total Fark left alts. None of the main stays show up in these threads. Funny about that.
 
2014-07-16 01:10:33 PM  

notto: Phinn:

The people who eagerly take from other people are disgusting, reprehensible human beings. The people who applaud and advocate for even more of this kind of behavior are a cancer in the asshole of humanity, and the world would be better off if they all died.

[www.habitatforhorses.org image 504x320]
Disgusting, reprehensible

[cloudfront.mediamatters.org image 640x480]
Cancer in the asshole of humanity.


Yes, people who demand, as a matter of right, that others are obligated to pay for your goods and services, are scum.

The goods and services in question can be anything that constitutes property, whether it's grazing rights or medical insurance or birth control pills.

In the case of Bundy, I'm afraid I don't know enough about the case to comment.  I know he had some sort of claim that it was his land, but have no idea if that claim was valid.  That sort of dispute is what courts are for -- to settle disputed titles to land and other rights of land use.

That's not the same level of asshole-cancer behavior as, for example, constructing an elaborate ideology that employees in general are entitled, somehow, to force their employers to pay for their insurance in general or their birth control in particular.

Bundy may have been wrong.  I don't know.  But even if he is, that's a unique dispute over a particular piece of land, and not a particularly interesting topic as a broad legal or ethical concern.

In contrast, the entire leftist ideology is an intellectual cancer.  The latest jargon emanating from its chief propagandists seems to revolve around calling recreational sex-tools "medical care."  Even worse, these asshole-cancers are now calling not-paying-for-other-people's-stuff a form of "denying access."

As though the grocery store is denying me access to food when they expect me to pay for it.

As though the Porsche dealer is denying me access to their well-engineered sports cars when they withhold the car keys from me.

You, for example, are denying me access to your bank account, right now.

I expect otherwise intelligent people to know better, so can only conclude that the people who promote this garbage are hopelessly corrupt.
 
Displayed 39 of 39 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is 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