Can we now call Øbamacare a failure?

[Ivytalk]

Taking a ride on the slow train today I see.

No, Medicare and Medicaid are clearly not free market...hence the rofl emoji. But poor over-burdened capitalistic Aetna is happy about that right now.

Here's a quaint little piece about the history of the ACA and who wrote it from that bastion of progtardism, Redstate, to help with your enlightenment, Balderdash...

http://www.redstate.com/diary/lakeworth ... acas-past/

Grasping at straws I see.

The article you posted had lots of phrases like "data suggests", "I suppose", and "most likely". Not to mention, the main "source" of the article is linked to a now defunct website. With top notch evidence like that, you should have included a link to a spandos youtube video as well.

Get a good night's rest, klam. Maybe you'll have a better day tomorrow.

Yep, our Klam is a real conservative. Barely to the right of Mao.

[kalm]

Taking a ride on the slow train today I see.

No, Medicare and Medicaid are clearly not free market...hence the rofl emoji. But poor over-burdened capitalistic Aetna is happy about that right now.

Here's a quaint little piece about the history of the ACA and who wrote it from that bastion of progtardism, Redstate, to help with your enlightenment, Balderdash...

http://www.redstate.com/diary/lakeworth ... acas-past/

Grasping at straws I see.

The article you posted had lots of phrases like "data suggests", "I suppose", and "most likely". Not to mention, the main "source" of the article is linked to a now defunct website. With top notch evidence like that, you should have included a link to a spandos youtube video as well.

Get a good night's rest, klam. Maybe you'll have a better day tomorrow.

I was just trying to use a source you'd like. It's not my fault that conk journalism sucks although you're going to have a tough time finding evidence that the health insurance companies didn't spend a ton in campaign donations to Obama and the Dems and play a massive part in rolling out Obamacare.

According to another liberal source, Charles Krauthammer, they even got a bailout written into it (although according to politifact, he's only half right).

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/st ... e-company/

Insurance companies don't want to have to pay for the high risk and low profit exchanges and neither do their share holders. So they're now against the ACA... after they were for it.

Beautiful!

Meanwhile, they still like Medicare and Medicaid, and are still doing quite well off those.

If only someone would have thought of creating a Medicare Part E(everyone) type program.

[kalm]

Grasping at straws I see.

The article you posted had lots of phrases like "data suggests", "I suppose", and "most likely". Not to mention, the main "source" of the article is linked to a now defunct website. With top notch evidence like that, you should have included a link to a spandos youtube video as well.

Get a good night's rest, klam. Maybe you'll have a better day tomorrow.

Yep, our Klam is a real conservative. Barely to the right of Mao.

Evidently, so were John Chaffee, Bob Dole, Chuck Grassly, and Orin Hatch when they first co-sponsored the original Obamacare.

[Ivytalk]

Yep, our Klam is a real conservative. Barely to the right of Mao.

Evidently, so were John Chaffee, Bob Dole, Chuck Grassly, and Orin Hatch when they first co-sponsored the original Obamacare.

And what, pray tell, is the "original Obamacare"? The 1993 version of Hillarycare? Don't worry, Klam, your progtard street cred is safe with me!

[kalm]

Evidently, so were John Chaffee, Bob Dole, Chuck Grassly, and Orin Hatch when they first co-sponsored the original Obamacare.

And what, pray tell, is the "original Obamacare"? The 1993 version of Hillarycare? Don't worry, Klam, your progtard street cred is safe with me!

Thanks!

The two plans are of course not identical but the concept of exchanges are similar. Obama claims it's where the idea came from.

[Baldy]

Grasping at straws I see.

The article you posted had lots of phrases like "data suggests", "I suppose", and "most likely". Not to mention, the main "source" of the article is linked to a now defunct website. With top notch evidence like that, you should have included a link to a spandos youtube video as well.

Get a good night's rest, klam. Maybe you'll have a better day tomorrow.

I was just trying to use a source you'd like. It's not my fault that conk journalism sucks although you're going to have a tough time finding evidence that the health insurance companies didn't spend a ton in campaign donations to Obama and the Dems and play a massive part in rolling out Obamacare.

According to another liberal source, Charles Krauthammer, they even got a bailout written into it (although according to politifact, he's only half right).

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/st ... e-company/

Insurance companies don't want to have to pay for the high risk and low profit exchanges and neither do their share holders. So they're now against the ACA... after they were for it.

Beautiful!

Meanwhile, they still like Medicare and Medicaid, and are still doing quite well off those.

If only someone would have thought of creating a Medicare Part E(everyone) type program.

Do you have some form of early onset dementia or something?

I was screaming from the rooftops back in 2009 how the insurance companies were being bought off. When they saw this massive failure on the horizon, they drew a line in the sand and prepared for war. A bailout had to be part of the legislation (among many other things) or the insurance companies would have never agreed to participate. I know you can be thick at times, but really? JTFC.

[HI54UNI]

Yep, our Klam is a real conservative. Barely to the right of Mao.

Evidently, so were John Chaffee, Bob Dole, Chuck Grassly, and Orin Hatch when they first co-sponsored the original Obamacare.

None of those listed are conservatives. They only play conservatives on TV.

[Baldy]

Evidently, so were John Chaffee, Bob Dole, Chuck Grassly, and Orin Hatch when they first co-sponsored the original Obamacare.

None of those listed are conservatives. They only play conservatives on TV.

The "original Obamacare" isn't what he thinks it is, either.

[houndawg]

I see you are still a big fan of myths and Donk talking points.

Don't fool yoursehttp://www.redstate.com/diary/lakeworthcane/20 ... as-past/lf, Obamacare was sitting in some Donk operatives desk for years just waiting for the day it could be pulled out and crammed down the throats of the American people. Congratulations.

You still think Medicare and Medicaid is the free market. :dunce:

Taking a ride on the slow train today I see.

No, Medicare and Medicaid are clearly not free market...hence the rofl emoji. But poor over-burdened capitalistic Aetna is happy about that right now.

Here's a quaint little piece about the history of the ACA and who wrote it from that bastion of progtardism, Redstate, to help with your enlightenment, Balderdash...

http://www.redstate.com/diary/lakeworth ... acas-past/

Don't worry, baldness, the Tea Party is out there to keep the guvmint out of your medicare.

[SDHornet]

The"Free Market" and "Health Care" are NOT compatible agents in a chemistry set...
And nobody really knows what the answer is

I want to be able to pay my doctor with a chicken.

[Ivytalk]

The"Free Market" and "Health Care" are NOT compatible agents in a chemistry set...
And nobody really knows what the answer is

I want to be able to pay my doctor with a chicken.

Where do you think you are? Haiti?

[SDHornet]

I want to be able to pay my doctor with a chicken.

Where do you think you are? Haiti?

Nevada.

[Pwns]

Et tu, Slate?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... acare.html

Why don't they want people to have health insurance?

[Ibanez]

Et tu, Slate?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... acare.html

Why don't they want people to have health insurance?

The truth always comes out.

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/29 ... ing-in-two

Increasingly, there are two ObamaCares.

There’s the one in coastal and northern areas, where the marketplaces include multiple insurers and plans. And there’s the one in southern and rural areas, where there is often little competition, a situation that can lead to higher premiums.

[BDKJMU]

There won't be single payer unless the donks ever control the White House AND a Super Majority in Congress (which they briefly had in 2009 for 134 days. Remember Al Franken became the 60th vote in July 09'; then Kennedy died in Aug 09'; then the Mass legislature changed their law so the Mass donk gov could appoint a donk fill in for Kennedy Sept 09'. Weld then won the seat back for Republicans in a special election that fall and was seated Jan 10', taking the Senate back to 59 donks/41 conks). If it wasn't for Franken's 60th vote there would be no Obamcare today (at least as we know it). Even if Clinton wins and the donks take the Senate (currently 54 conk/46 donk), they will have a low 50s majority, nowhere close to 60 seats, they won't have the House, and they will invariably lose seats in the 2018 midterms. If we ever see single payer it won't be till the 2020s at least..

[SDHornet]

There won't be single payer unless the donks ever control the White House AND a Super Majority in Congress (which they briefly had in 2009 for 134 days. Remember Al Franken became the 60th vote in July 09'; then Kennedy died in Aug 09'; then the Mass legislature changed their law so the Mass donk gov could appoint a donk fill in for Kennedy Sept 09'. Weld then won the seat back for Republicans in a special election that fall and was seated Jan 10', taking the Senate back to 59 donks/41 conks). If it wasn't for Franken's 60th vote there would be no Obamcare today (at least as we know it). Even if Clinton wins and the donks take the Senate (currently 54 conk/46 donk), they will have a low 50s majority, nowhere close to 60 seats, they won't have the House, and they will invariably lose seats in the 2018 midterms. If we ever see single payer it won't be till the 2020s at least..

How many times do I have to explain this to you morons...

Congress doesn't matter starting with the next POTUS...especially a hilldog admin. The inept conk congress proved Congress is meaningless to the daily operation of the gov (no budgets passed), and with a leftist stacked SCOTUS Congress will essentially be completely removed from the legislative aspects of how this country runs (DACA was one Judge away from granting POTUS the right to create and enforce laws as needed). Wake the fuck up and stop claiming conks holding anything other than POTUS actually matters.

[BDKJMU]

There won't be single payer unless the donks ever control the White House AND a Super Majority in Congress (which they briefly had in 2009 for 134 days. Remember Al Franken became the 60th vote in July 09'; then Kennedy died in Aug 09'; then the Mass legislature changed their law so the Mass donk gov could appoint a donk fill in for Kennedy Sept 09'. Weld then won the seat back for Republicans in a special election that fall and was seated Jan 10', taking the Senate back to 59 donks/41 conks). If it wasn't for Franken's 60th vote there would be no Obamcare today (at least as we know it). Even if Clinton wins and the donks take the Senate (currently 54 conk/46 donk), they will have a low 50s majority, nowhere close to 60 seats, they won't have the House, and they will invariably lose seats in the 2018 midterms. If we ever see single payer it won't be till the 2020s at least..

How many times do I have to explain this to you morons...

Congress doesn't matter starting with the next POTUS...especially a hilldog admin. The inept conk congress proved Congress is meaningless to the daily operation of the gov (no budgets passed), and with a leftist stacked SCOTUS Congress will essentially be completely removed from the legislative aspects of how this country runs (DACA was one Judge away from granting POTUS the right to create and enforce laws as needed). Wake the **** up and stop claiming conks holding anything other than POTUS actually matters.

Not even Clinton will be able to install nationwide single payer (something far bigger than DACA) by executive fiat..In 4 years Clinton will be replacing one (Scalia's replacement), maybe 2 of the non liberal justices. Even with a 5-4 or 6-3. They're not going to be able to completely remove the legislative aspects of how this country runs. Don't go all expandspanos on us

[SDHornet]

How many times do I have to explain this to you morons...

Congress doesn't matter starting with the next POTUS...especially a hilldog admin. The inept conk congress proved Congress is meaningless to the daily operation of the gov (no budgets passed), and with a leftist stacked SCOTUS Congress will essentially be completely removed from the legislative aspects of how this country runs (DACA was one Judge away from granting POTUS the right to create and enforce laws as needed). Wake the **** up and stop claiming conks holding anything other than POTUS actually matters.

Not even Clinton will be able to install nationwide single payer (something far bigger than DACA) by executive fiat..In 4 years Clinton will be replacing one (Scalia's replacement), maybe 2 of the non liberal justices. Even with a 5-4 or 6-3. They're not going to be able to completely remove the legislative aspects of how this country runs. Don't go all expandspanos on us

Gradual executive over reach is spandos territory? What America have you been living in?

[BDKJMU]

Not even Clinton will be able to install nationwide single payer (something far bigger than DACA) by executive fiat..In 4 years Clinton will be replacing one (Scalia's replacement), maybe 2 of the non liberal justices. Even with a 5-4 or 6-3. They're not going to be able to completely remove the legislative aspects of how this country runs. Don't go all expandspanos on us

Gradual executive over reach is spandos territory? What America have you been living in?

First of all, nothing gradual about trying to enact single payer by executive fiat..

Secondly, DACA mainly dealt with enforcement vs non enforcement and bestowing temporary legal status. It didn't involve large appropriations by Congress. Single payer would involve over 1/6 of the US economy, and massive appropriations by Congress in the hundreds of billions of dollars. There is ZERO chance that could be done by executive fiat.

We will see womb to tomb single payer only if one of the 2 happens:
-The donks get the WH & a supermajority in Congress (or very close)
and/or
-Polls show the majority of the public overwhelmingly favors it.

And neither of those is close to happening- yet. Either way if we see it in our lifetimes it won't be till at least the 2020s..But go ahead and keep believing we are going to see Clinton enact single payer by executive fiat..

[BDKJMU]

So lets ignore reality, enter fantasy land and pretend if Clinton is elected, she could install single payer by executive fiat.
-She wouldn't likely attempt it before the the 2018 midterms, because she is first and foremost a politician, and she would be worried about losing in the midterms.
-She wouldn't likely attempt it before the 2020 presidential campaign because she'll be worried about re-election.
-And even if she was re-elected (I think if she wins in Nov she'll be a 1 termer due to being a disaster and/or health issues) she wouldn't do it before the 2022 midterms- again she's a politician.

She would do the same as Obama did with his most controversial, most criticized exec action, DACA, that is wait till after the 2nd term midterms (late 2022) when elections were no longer a concern (Obama issued his DACA fiat in Nov 2014, right after 2nd term mid terms).

But, there will be another Conk elected in the WH at some point in the future, be it in 5 months, or 4 years/5 months, or 8 years/5 months. And with the stroke of a pen, the executive actions of the prior POTUS can be undone. Obama's DACA exec order is done with the next conk in the WH..

So even if Clinton could do single payer by executive fiat (again she can't), it would take years to set up, and would be undone by the stroke of the pen of the next conk POTUS.

Major laws passed by Congress (like Obamacare) almost impossible to overturn. Executive actions easy to overturn (by the next POTUS of the opposite party).

[SDHornet]

That's a lot of spin from someone that is supposedly not worried about executive fiat.

[JohnStOnge]

Someone may already have typed this but remember that there are those who say that the thing was designed to "fail" so that we'd have to move to a single payer system.

[Chizzang]

Someone may already have typed this but remember that there are those who say that the thing was designed to "fail" so that we'd have to move to a single payer system.

I finding that hard to digest... It's giving me gas
I don't think we have a single politician in our present system smart enough
to work out that elaborate of an end game

[CID1990]

Someone may already have typed this but remember that there are those who say that the thing was designed to "fail" so that we'd have to move to a single payer system.

I finding that hard to digest... It's giving me gas
I don't think we have a single politician in our present system smart enough
to work out that elaborate of an end game

I tend to agree with you but-

This isn't a 911 conspiracy that relies on hyper-competence on the part of government and active complicity and silence on the part of thousands of officials

It just relies on a few politicians saying let's design a really crappy government program so it has to be replaced with something draconian

Our government is very competent with that level of incompetence

[BDKJMU]

Yesterday:
"Health-care exchange sign-ups fall far short of forecasts

Enrollment in the insurance exchanges for President Obama’s signature health-care law is at less than half the initial forecast, pushing several major insurance companies to stop offering health plans in certain markets because of significant financial losses.

As a result, the administration’s promise of a menu of health-plan choices has been replaced by a grim, though preliminary, forecast: Next year, more than 1 in 4 counties are at risk of having a single insurer on its exchange, said Cynthia Cox, who studies health reform for the Kaiser Family Foundation......

......In February 2013, the Congressional Budget Office predicted that 24 million people would buy health coverage through the federally and state-operated online exchanges by this year. Just 11.1 million people were signed up as of late March......

.....And people who do outreach to the uninsured say the enrollment process itself has been more complex and confusing than Obama’s initial comparison to buying a plane ticket......"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... story.html

Signing up for health care is as simple as buying a plane ticket..