10 Top Reasons You Owe The Nation

[Two Thumbs]

I'd like to know what the improvements were.

It's been a year

What got better?

 

[PoliticalChic]

"You got your degree?"
With what? An article with no facts or evidence? Time to go back to school it seems.

I'll humor you though. It says this bill "kills jobs". That couldn't be further from the truth. Less people NEED jobs because of this bill does not mean it kills jobs. The jobs are still there for the taking, there are just less people who need them. This has been a persistent distortion of the facts an and outright lie.

Well, your degree must be in economics, since you have no clue that raising costs for small businesses limits their ability to expand, i.e., create jobs.

What a weak, not to mention bogus, defense of your disquisiton. Didn't you trumpet: ""Every item on that list is either blatantly incorrect or a severe distortion of reality."

Every? Since you mention one single item of the ten, (and got that wrong) either you don't understand the word 'every,' or you use hyperbole, usually the venue of teenage girls....Oops! Are you a teenage girl??

Now, since your attempt to obnubilate has fallen short, as has your second attempt, the one above...would you like a third bite of the apple, or simply go down to ignominious defeat?

It won't mean you're a bad person....simply a loser.

BTW, not for nothing, as we say in the Big Apple, but your avatar is one of the two or three most offensive on the board.
Just sayin'...

There is no way in hell I am going to waste my time debunking a list of ridiculous claims that have no proof to begin with. I debunked one and you don't like it, not my problem. Post something with actual facts next time. I thought you were smarter then this? Posting something that uses itself as the source? Really? You should know better.

How is my avatar offensive? Did you know Jesus or the dinosaurs personally?

1. "There is no way in hell I am going to waste my time debunking a list of ridiculous claims..."
Now, this is a truly illustrative sentence, taken in context with the fact that you have already put forth several posts attempting, albeit ineffectually, to do just that.
Bravo! A new way to wave the white flag.

2. "I debunked one and you don't like it,..."
Au contraire, mon frère, as John Kerry might say....I showed how utterly incorrect your response was, so you hardly 'debunked' anything.

3. "How is my avatar offensive? Did you know Jesus ..."
See, in your own answer you answer the question you asked!
You realized right off the bat why one might find it offensive!
And answering your own question!... an excellent time saver it is!


Although you might find this question off topic, but since I do appreciate the fact that you have attempted to respond to the OP, I wonder if you have a theory as to why seemingly multitudes of folks are opposed to Obamacare.

 

[RDD_1210]

I'd like to know what the improvements were.

It's been a year

What got better?

The full changes are scheduled to be implemented until 2014 but there have been plenty of changes so far.

Implementation Timeline - Kaiser Health Reform

Just in 2010 here is what was put in to place

* Free mammograms and colonoscopies: Health plans years beginning on or after Sept. 23 have to cover a number of preventive services like mammograms and colonoscopies for free. No deductible, co-pay or coinsurance.
* No health insurance rescissions: Health insurance companies cannot drop you from your individual health insurance plan if you get sick.
* Children’s coverage: New individual plans and existing group plans cannot deny coverage to children with pre-existing conditions.
* No lifetime caps: Insurers cannot place lifetime caps on coverage. Annual limits must be approved by the government.
* Stay on parent’s plan until age 26: Adult children will be eligible for coverage as dependents on their parents' policies until they are 26, unless they have access to health insurance through a job.
* Appeal denials: New plans must include a way to appeal coverage determinations or claims. An external review process must also be established.
* No lifetime dollar limits: Lifetime dollar limits on essential benefits, like hospital stays, are no longer allowed.

 

[RDD_1210]

Well, your degree must be in economics, since you have no clue that raising costs for small businesses limits their ability to expand, i.e., create jobs.

What a weak, not to mention bogus, defense of your disquisiton. Didn't you trumpet: ""Every item on that list is either blatantly incorrect or a severe distortion of reality."

Every? Since you mention one single item of the ten, (and got that wrong) either you don't understand the word 'every,' or you use hyperbole, usually the venue of teenage girls....Oops! Are you a teenage girl??

Now, since your attempt to obnubilate has fallen short, as has your second attempt, the one above...would you like a third bite of the apple, or simply go down to ignominious defeat?

It won't mean you're a bad person....simply a loser.

BTW, not for nothing, as we say in the Big Apple, but your avatar is one of the two or three most offensive on the board.
Just sayin'...

There is no way in hell I am going to waste my time debunking a list of ridiculous claims that have no proof to begin with. I debunked one and you don't like it, not my problem. Post something with actual facts next time. I thought you were smarter then this? Posting something that uses itself as the source? Really? You should know better.

How is my avatar offensive? Did you know Jesus or the dinosaurs personally?

2. "I debunked one and you don't like it,..."
Au contraire, mon frère, as John Kerry might say....I showed how utterly incorrect your response was, so you hardly 'debunked' anything.

Actually, just like your OP, you have proven nothing, but believe what you want.

3. "How is my avatar offensive? Did you know Jesus ..."
See, in your own answer you answer the question you asked!
You realized right off the bat why one might find it offensive!
And answering your own question!... an excellent time saver it is!

What? You know Jesus personally? If that avatar actually offends you, I think you need to lighten up a bit. You're obviously wound WAY too tight.

Although you might find this question off topic, but since I do appreciate the fact that you have attempted to respond to the OP, I wonder if you have a theory as to why seemingly multitudes of folks are opposed to Obamacare.

Simple answer: Because those individuals are just not smart people. They don't bother to read up for themselves what is actually in the bill and instead blindly believe websites that lack supporting information. (ie. OP)

 

[PoliticalChic]

The more time goes by, the more evident it is that:
1. The reasons the Left gave for supporting Obamacare, voiced by the President, as a) will not increase costs, and b) "if you like your current health insurance, nothing changes, except your costs will go down by as much as $2,500 per year." http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/issues/HealthCareFullPlan.pdf and c) everyone will be covered by the plan, as implied in "If you don’t have health insurance, you will have a choice of new, affordable health insurance." Ibid.
are untrue, and designed to hide the true motivation.

2. We on the Right have claimed that government take-over of healthcare, with the associated rationing and cuts in choice and quality, and the commensurate depredation of private healthcare companies who will have to increase benefits without increased in price will be the true result....are proving correct.

3. Real improvements such as sale across state lines, elimination of mandates, and tort reform were never even considered by the statists, revealing their true intentions.

 

[PoliticalChic]

There is no way in hell I am going to waste my time debunking a list of ridiculous claims that have no proof to begin with. I debunked one and you don't like it, not my problem. Post something with actual facts next time. I thought you were smarter then this? Posting something that uses itself as the source? Really? You should know better.

How is my avatar offensive? Did you know Jesus or the dinosaurs personally?

2. "I debunked one and you don't like it,..."
Au contraire, mon frère, as John Kerry might say....I showed how utterly incorrect your response was, so you hardly 'debunked' anything.

Actually, just like your OP, you have proven nothing, but believe what you want.

3. "How is my avatar offensive? Did you know Jesus ..."
See, in your own answer you answer the question you asked!
You realized right off the bat why one might find it offensive!
And answering your own question!... an excellent time saver it is!

What? You know Jesus personally? If that avatar actually offends you, I think you need to lighten up a bit. You're obviously wound WAY too tight.

Although you might find this question off topic, but since I do appreciate the fact that you have attempted to respond to the OP, I wonder if you have a theory as to why seemingly multitudes of folks are opposed to Obamacare.

Simple answer: Because those individuals are just not smart people. They don't bother to read up for themselves what is actually in the bill and instead blindly believe websites that lack supporting information. (ie. OP)

I actually feel a bit guilty, because I do not see myself as a devious person...but I may be so in this connection:
I asked the question fully expecting the Progressive/Liberal response: "we know best, we are the smart ones, and anyone who disagrees is a dolt."

And you say: "Simple answer: Because those individuals are just not smart people."


This is the essence of totalism. We know best, so we'll simply force you to do what we say!

Dennis Prager, prescient once again, said it so succinctly, the definition of a liberal:

GOOD INTENTIONS PLUS COERSION EQUALS SOLUTION.

Now, I know you're not a bad person, Rural, just benighted. You need to pick up some books covering the history of the 20th century, and see the result of totalist thinking in places like Germany, the Soviet Union, North Korea....need I go on, or you get my drift?

 

[Two Thumbs]

I'd like to know what the improvements were.

It's been a year

What got better?

The full changes are scheduled to be implemented until 2014 but there have been plenty of changes so far.

Implementation Timeline - Kaiser Health Reform

Just in 2010 here is what was put in to place

* Free mammograms and colonoscopies: Health plans years beginning on or after Sept. 23 have to cover a number of preventive services like mammograms and colonoscopies for free. No deductible, co-pay or coinsurance. Nothing is free. The cost will be passed somehow.
* No health insurance rescissions: Health insurance companies cannot drop you from your individual health insurance plan if you get sick. good, I only heard of this on TV, but it's good to have this.
* Children’s coverage: New individual plans and existing group plans cannot deny coverage to children with pre-existing conditions. that's ok. The cost is going to be nuts to cover this, and from my premium jump, it is.
* No lifetime caps: Insurers cannot place lifetime caps on coverage. Annual limits must be approved by the government. hmmm
* Stay on parent’s plan until age 26: Adult children will be eligible for coverage as dependents on their parents' policies until they are 26, unless they have access to health insurance through a job. lame. These are adults and need to tend to themselves.
* Appeal denials: New plans must include a way to appeal coverage determinations or claims. when couldn't you do this? An external review process must also be established. More governement I assume.
* No lifetime dollar limits: Lifetime dollar limits on essential benefits, like hospital stays, are no longer allowed.

Well I can tell you from the VAST jump in premiums I'm paying, this didn't work out for everyone.

oh well

No good deed goes unpunished.

 

[RDD_1210]

I'd like to know what the improvements were.

It's been a year

What got better?

The full changes are scheduled to be implemented until 2014 but there have been plenty of changes so far.

Implementation Timeline - Kaiser Health Reform

Just in 2010 here is what was put in to place

* Free mammograms and colonoscopies: Health plans years beginning on or after Sept. 23 have to cover a number of preventive services like mammograms and colonoscopies for free. No deductible, co-pay or coinsurance. Nothing is free. The cost will be passed somehow.
* No health insurance rescissions: Health insurance companies cannot drop you from your individual health insurance plan if you get sick. good, I only heard of this on TV, but it's good to have this.
* Children’s coverage: New individual plans and existing group plans cannot deny coverage to children with pre-existing conditions. that's ok. The cost is going to be nuts to cover this, and from my premium jump, it is.
* No lifetime caps: Insurers cannot place lifetime caps on coverage. Annual limits must be approved by the government. hmmm
* Stay on parent’s plan until age 26: Adult children will be eligible for coverage as dependents on their parents' policies until they are 26, unless they have access to health insurance through a job. lame. These are adults and need to tend to themselves.
* Appeal denials: New plans must include a way to appeal coverage determinations or claims. when couldn't you do this? An external review process must also be established. More governement I assume.
* No lifetime dollar limits: Lifetime dollar limits on essential benefits, like hospital stays, are no longer allowed.

Well I can tell you from the VAST jump in premiums I'm paying, this didn't work out for everyone.

oh well

No good deed goes unpunished.

You're judging the effectiveness of these initial items on your premiums? The full legislation isn't due to be fully implemented for years. Only then can we know the complete affect of how these changes impact health care.

 

[Two Thumbs]

The full changes are scheduled to be implemented until 2014 but there have been plenty of changes so far.

Implementation Timeline - Kaiser Health Reform

Just in 2010 here is what was put in to place

* Free mammograms and colonoscopies: Health plans years beginning on or after Sept. 23 have to cover a number of preventive services like mammograms and colonoscopies for free. No deductible, co-pay or coinsurance. Nothing is free. The cost will be passed somehow.
* No health insurance rescissions: Health insurance companies cannot drop you from your individual health insurance plan if you get sick. good, I only heard of this on TV, but it's good to have this.
* Children’s coverage: New individual plans and existing group plans cannot deny coverage to children with pre-existing conditions. that's ok. The cost is going to be nuts to cover this, and from my premium jump, it is.
* No lifetime caps: Insurers cannot place lifetime caps on coverage. Annual limits must be approved by the government. hmmm
* Stay on parent’s plan until age 26: Adult children will be eligible for coverage as dependents on their parents' policies until they are 26, unless they have access to health insurance through a job. lame. These are adults and need to tend to themselves.
* Appeal denials: New plans must include a way to appeal coverage determinations or claims. when couldn't you do this? An external review process must also be established. More governement I assume.
* No lifetime dollar limits: Lifetime dollar limits on essential benefits, like hospital stays, are no longer allowed.

Well I can tell you from the VAST jump in premiums I'm paying, this didn't work out for everyone.

oh well

No good deed goes unpunished.

You're judging the effectiveness of these initial items on your premiums? The full legislation isn't due to be fully implemented for years. Only then can we know the complete affect of how these changes impact health care.

Everything costs money.

Let me explain what what you said means.

You had to spend more money to cover all the things we did, but wait until you see how high those premiums get by 2014!!
!









ok the muahaha, was an add on. call it artistic flair.

 

[RDD_1210]

Well I can tell you from the VAST jump in premiums I'm paying, this didn't work out for everyone.

oh well

No good deed goes unpunished.

You're judging the effectiveness of these initial items on your premiums? The full legislation isn't due to be fully implemented for years. Only then can we know the complete affect of how these changes impact health care.

Everything costs money.

Let me explain what what you said means.

You had to spend more money to cover all the things we did, but wait until you see how high those premiums get by 2014!!
!









ok the muahaha, was an add on. call it artistic flair.

LOL, ok. To be fair you should wait to pass judgment on something only once it's actually complete.

 

[Two Thumbs]

You're judging the effectiveness of these initial items on your premiums? The full legislation isn't due to be fully implemented for years. Only then can we know the complete affect of how these changes impact health care.

Everything costs money.

Let me explain what what you said means.

You had to spend more money to cover all the things we did, but wait until you see how high those premiums get by 2014!!
!









ok the muahaha, was an add on. call it artistic flair.

LOL, ok. To be fair you should wait to pass judgment on something only once it's actually complete.

That doesn't make any sense.

The HC law isn't an unfinished car, house or painting, where the end product has little to no affect on me.

Me and my family just took a hard blow to th body. I think I can judge a person that punched me as someone that is about to do it again, especially if he says he's not done yet.

 

[RDD_1210]

Everything costs money.

Let me explain what what you said means.

You had to spend more money to cover all the things we did, but wait until you see how high those premiums get by 2014!!
!

ok the muahaha, was an add on. call it artistic flair.

LOL, ok. To be fair you should wait to pass judgment on something only once it's actually complete.

That doesn't make any sense.

The HC law isn't an unfinished car, house or painting, where the end product has little to no affect on me.

Me and my family just took a hard blow to th body. I think I can judge a person that punched me as someone that is about to do it again, especially if he says he's not done yet.

What? I didn't say the end product has no affect on you. I said that's the most important part to consider...the end product.....which we won't see for a few more years.

Health care premiums have been going up for years now, which is one of the primary reasons we need healthcare reform. Few if any of the cost control portions of this legislation have yet to be enacted, so of course your costs will still be increasing. If this was an overnight fix, it would have been done years ago with little effort.

 

[Polk]

Emily Miller writes on the day of infamy...I mean anniversary of Obamacare...
Here is the outline.

"These are the top 10 failures of ObamaCare, starting with those that have had the most serious effect already on the economy, jobs, and the American people.

1. Explodes the Budget Deficit

2. Kills Jobs

3. Lose Your Own Doctor and Health Plan

4. States’ Budget Deficits Grow to Possible Bankruptcy

5. Higher Insurance Premiums:

6. Crushes Businesses

7. Fewer Americans Have Access to Health Insurance

8. Senior Citizens Lose Medicare Coverage:

9. Overburdens Small Business

10. Tax Hikes
Top 10 Failures of ObamaCare After One Year - HUMAN EVENTS

OK, one more opportunity to you Lefties to apologize...
...and genuflecting would be nice.


Waiting.

Every item on that list is either blatantly incorrect or a severe distortion of reality. How sad that people actually believe crap like this rather then do their own research.

Can't wait to see the rebuttal you produce when you "do their own research."

Or....are you just a compendium of cliches, and the real cause of global warming....


Waiting.

I'll start the ball rolling with addressing the first two points...

The first is made up completely cooked up numbers. The claim that the CBO said ACA increases the deficit comes from a report requested by Paul Ryan where he asked for part of the bill to be excluded from the analysis. It just happened to be a portion that reduced spending compared to the baseline. CBO's actual analysis of the bill said it will reduce the deficit by 143 billion relative the baseline.

The second proposal is a lie of omission. The ACA will result in fewer people being employed. However, the reason for that is because it enable people cost to retirement age to leave their jobs earlier than they would otherwise, because they don't have to worry about being uninsured until they qualify for Medicare. If anything, that's a feature, not a bug.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Every item on that list is either blatantly incorrect or a severe distortion of reality. How sad that people actually believe crap like this rather then do their own research.

Can't wait to see the rebuttal you produce when you "do their own research."

Or....are you just a compendium of cliches, and the real cause of global warming....


Waiting.

I'll start the ball rolling with addressing the first two points...

The first is made up completely cooked up numbers. The claim that the CBO said ACA increases the deficit comes from a report requested by Paul Ryan where he asked for part of the bill to be excluded from the analysis. It just happened to be a portion that reduced spending compared to the baseline. CBO's actual analysis of the bill said it will reduce the deficit by 143 billion relative the baseline.

The second proposal is a lie of omission. The ACA will result in fewer people being employed. However, the reason for that is because it enable people cost to retirement age to leave their jobs earlier than they would otherwise, because they don't have to worry about being uninsured until they qualify for Medicare. If anything, that's a feature, not a bug.

"...completely cooked up numbers..."

I don't believe you are dishonest....just ignorant.
After all, if you have an elementary understanding of arithmatic, you couldn't claim to support the bill, the numbers, the context.

Here, let me...and Representive Ryan, help you understand.

1. CBO “bill cuts deficit by $132 billion in first 10 years…”Rep, Ryan indicates that this is illusory:
a. The bill double counts Medicare savings

b. And double counts increased taxes for Social Security

c. And double counts increased premiums for the CLASS (Community Living Assistance Services and Supports) Act, in which workers are stipulated to send a monthly premium in order to purchase coverage, usually via their employer. They need to pay into the program for five years at the very least in order to qualify for the benefits for the disabled, poor, or elderly people -which is believed to be least fifty dollars per day and assumed by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office to reach up to seventy-five dollars per day.

d. Without the ‘double count’ aspect, the bill actually results in a $460 billion deficit in the first 10 years and a $1.4 trillion deficit in the second ten years.

2. The double count aspect is explained as follows:

a. The bill raises taxes $ ½ billion and cuts Medicare $ ½ trillion during the first 10 years, but provides only six years of ‘benefits.’

b. While the extra money derives from the premiums for the new CLASS Act entitlement, but then these premiums are then also counted as deficit reduction.

c. And, while additional money in Social Security taxes is supposedly reserved to pay for Social Security benefits, it is also claimed in the bill to be a form of deficit reduction. So, why is it tapped as both payment for benefits, and as reducing costs?

d. The administration claims that all the Medicare cuts are to increase the solvency of Medicare, as a reserve for the program, but if this is so then it is unethical to use the ‘saved’ funds to create another government program.

3. CBO: “[the bill] would not cause a net increase in deficits in excess of $5 billion in any year of the four 10-year periods beginning after 2019.”

a. In the original version of the bill, members of labor unions would not have to pay taxes on “Cadillac” healthcare plans, a pay-back by Democrats to the unions- but everyone else who had to pay increased taxes on these plans, and this would pay most of the costs of the new healthcare ‘reform.’ When this became public news, the administration changed the proposal to this: everyone would pay said taxes, but not until 2018! But, of course, logic suggests that the Congress in existence eight years from now would not impose a $1 trillion tax that this Congress had not the nerve to impose.

b. A new unelected bureaucratic Commission would be in charge of Medicare, to ration care and wring out even more cuts than the $1/2 billion in the bill. If unable or unwilling to do this, of course, the CBO estimates are invalid.

c. The Chief Actuary in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in the Obama Health and Human Services department issued a memorandum stating that HR 3200, the basis for the President’s plan would increase healthcare costs by $ 234 billion over the first 10 years. Obama on Health Care: Half Right | Cato @ Liberty


And, of course, the '1099 Fix' the administration is scrambling to install admits that the bill will make it harder for small businesses to be profitable....i.e., to hire more workers.
"In addition to repeal, Sen. Debbie Stabenow has introduced an amendment to eliminate the 1099 reporting requirement, which passed in the health care bill. Congress has tried to eliminate this requirement numerous times in the past several months, as small businesses abhor the requirement that they send out 1099 forms on any vendor purchase of over $600. The requirement was put into health care to increase government revenue (basically by enforcing tax laws on the books), and Stabenow’s amendment replaces that revenue by rescinding unobligated funds in budgets other than defense, homeland security and the Social Security Administration. This is a real capitulation to Mike Johanns and the Republicans."
Health Care Repeal, 1099 Fix Votes Up Today | FDL News Desk

So the overriding principle, that the bill is an attempt to control, contol, control and grow government, grow government, and then...grow government....is clear to any thinking individual.

Rather than 'start the ball rolling,' you seem to have choked on it.

Next.

(But I like the shirt!)

 

[spectrumc01]

Emily Miller writes on the day of infamy...I mean anniversary of Obamacare...
Here is the outline.

"These are the top 10 failures of ObamaCare, starting with those that have had the most serious effect already on the economy, jobs, and the American people.

1. Explodes the Budget Deficit

2. Kills Jobs

3. Lose Your Own Doctor and Health Plan

4. States’ Budget Deficits Grow to Possible Bankruptcy

5. Higher Insurance Premiums:

6. Crushes Businesses

7. Fewer Americans Have Access to Health Insurance

8. Senior Citizens Lose Medicare Coverage:

9. Overburdens Small Business

10. Tax Hikes
Top 10 Failures of ObamaCare After One Year - HUMAN EVENTS

OK, one more opportunity to you Lefties to apologize...
...and genuflecting would be nice.


Waiting.

1. The deficit has already exploded, and unless you have investments, or planning to make a life purches i.e. home, it doesn't effect you as much as you would think. you adapt, like riding your bike when gas gets completely out of hand like it is now.

2. Kills jobs? every cut we make in the federal buget is adding to the unemployment numbers, does that make balancing our budget a job killer?

3. I couldn't afford a doctor or health plan before Obama care and I can't afford one now. no change.

4. This is the same as number one.

5. Higher insurance premiums Name one time in the history of man that premiums ever rolled back due to legislation? I couldn't afford the premiums before Obama care, and I can't now.

6. The company I worked for cancelled our insurance before Obama care passed because the cost was too high.

7. Again, No Ins before or after.

8. I have insufiecent info on the elderly

9. Small businesses quit providing ins. long before Obama care.

10. Taxes would go up. This I agree would happen, but I and my family would have health care.

For me this is a no brainer. If I get health care out of this legislation, it was a good thing, and the fact that my taxes would go up I would gladdly pay it, as this means that I'm participating in paying my part of the bill, making health care not a freebie. Helping business by removing the burden of cost of logistical personel i.e. lawyers, customer service. Businesses would save millions.

 

[Polk]

Can't wait to see the rebuttal you produce when you "do their own research."

Or....are you just a compendium of cliches, and the real cause of global warming....


Waiting.

I'll start the ball rolling with addressing the first two points...

The first is made up completely cooked up numbers. The claim that the CBO said ACA increases the deficit comes from a report requested by Paul Ryan where he asked for part of the bill to be excluded from the analysis. It just happened to be a portion that reduced spending compared to the baseline. CBO's actual analysis of the bill said it will reduce the deficit by 143 billion relative the baseline.

The second proposal is a lie of omission. The ACA will result in fewer people being employed. However, the reason for that is because it enable people cost to retirement age to leave their jobs earlier than they would otherwise, because they don't have to worry about being uninsured until they qualify for Medicare. If anything, that's a feature, not a bug.

"...completely cooked up numbers..."

I don't believe you are dishonest....just ignorant.
After all, if you have an elementary understanding of arithmatic, you couldn't claim to support the bill, the numbers, the context.

Here, let me...and Representive Ryan, help you understand.

1. CBO “bill cuts deficit by $132 billion in first 10 years…”Rep, Ryan indicates that this is illusory:
a. The bill double counts Medicare savings

b. And double counts increased taxes for Social Security

c. And double counts increased premiums for the CLASS (Community Living Assistance Services and Supports) Act, in which workers are stipulated to send a monthly premium in order to purchase coverage, usually via their employer. They need to pay into the program for five years at the very least in order to qualify for the benefits for the disabled, poor, or elderly people -which is believed to be least fifty dollars per day and assumed by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office to reach up to seventy-five dollars per day.

d. Without the ‘double count’ aspect, the bill actually results in a $460 billion deficit in the first 10 years and a $1.4 trillion deficit in the second ten years.

2. The double count aspect is explained as follows:

a. The bill raises taxes $ ½ billion and cuts Medicare $ ½ trillion during the first 10 years, but provides only six years of ‘benefits.’

b. While the extra money derives from the premiums for the new CLASS Act entitlement, but then these premiums are then also counted as deficit reduction.

c. And, while additional money in Social Security taxes is supposedly reserved to pay for Social Security benefits, it is also claimed in the bill to be a form of deficit reduction. So, why is it tapped as both payment for benefits, and as reducing costs?

d. The administration claims that all the Medicare cuts are to increase the solvency of Medicare, as a reserve for the program, but if this is so then it is unethical to use the ‘saved’ funds to create another government program.

3. CBO: “[the bill] would not cause a net increase in deficits in excess of $5 billion in any year of the four 10-year periods beginning after 2019.”

a. In the original version of the bill, members of labor unions would not have to pay taxes on “Cadillac” healthcare plans, a pay-back by Democrats to the unions- but everyone else who had to pay increased taxes on these plans, and this would pay most of the costs of the new healthcare ‘reform.’ When this became public news, the administration changed the proposal to this: everyone would pay said taxes, but not until 2018! But, of course, logic suggests that the Congress in existence eight years from now would not impose a $1 trillion tax that this Congress had not the nerve to impose.

b. A new unelected bureaucratic Commission would be in charge of Medicare, to ration care and wring out even more cuts than the $1/2 billion in the bill. If unable or unwilling to do this, of course, the CBO estimates are invalid.

c. The Chief Actuary in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in the Obama Health and Human Services department issued a memorandum stating that HR 3200, the basis for the President’s plan would increase healthcare costs by $ 234 billion over the first 10 years. Obama on Health Care: Half Right | Cato @ Liberty


And, of course, the '1099 Fix' the administration is scrambling to install admits that the bill will make it harder for small businesses to be profitable....i.e., to hire more workers.
"In addition to repeal, Sen. Debbie Stabenow has introduced an amendment to eliminate the 1099 reporting requirement, which passed in the health care bill. Congress has tried to eliminate this requirement numerous times in the past several months, as small businesses abhor the requirement that they send out 1099 forms on any vendor purchase of over $600. The requirement was put into health care to increase government revenue (basically by enforcing tax laws on the books), and Stabenow’s amendment replaces that revenue by rescinding unobligated funds in budgets other than defense, homeland security and the Social Security Administration. This is a real capitulation to Mike Johanns and the Republicans."
Health Care Repeal, 1099 Fix Votes Up Today | FDL News Desk

So the overriding principle, that the bill is an attempt to control, contol, control and grow government, grow government, and then...grow government....is clear to any thinking individual.

Rather than 'start the ball rolling,' you seem to have choked on it.

Next.

(But I like the shirt!)

Your post consists of:

- More sophistry from Representive Ryan's office on the budget numbers. Color me shocked. Misleading claims about accounting principles? Check. Completely making things up, like say, an increase in Social Security taxes? Check. "The bill won't save money because Congress will refuse to stick to hard choices made"? True, but it's equally true of his plan to gut Medicare by turning it into a massive handout for insurance companies.

- A statement that doesn't mean what you think it means. The statement by the actuary at CMS is about total healthcare cost, not about the impact on the deficit. Of course covering another 40 million people is going to increase aggregate healthcare costs.

 

[The Gadfly]

The abortion that is Obama's plan is hardly anything the "left" was supporting, Lad.

What they wanted was single player HC.

Wake up and smell the conspiracy, lad.

What I smell, is a product that reeks of corruption in both content and process.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'll start the ball rolling with addressing the first two points...

The first is made up completely cooked up numbers. The claim that the CBO said ACA increases the deficit comes from a report requested by Paul Ryan where he asked for part of the bill to be excluded from the analysis. It just happened to be a portion that reduced spending compared to the baseline. CBO's actual analysis of the bill said it will reduce the deficit by 143 billion relative the baseline.

The second proposal is a lie of omission. The ACA will result in fewer people being employed. However, the reason for that is because it enable people cost to retirement age to leave their jobs earlier than they would otherwise, because they don't have to worry about being uninsured until they qualify for Medicare. If anything, that's a feature, not a bug.

"...completely cooked up numbers..."

I don't believe you are dishonest....just ignorant.
After all, if you have an elementary understanding of arithmatic, you couldn't claim to support the bill, the numbers, the context.

Here, let me...and Representive Ryan, help you understand.

1. CBO “bill cuts deficit by $132 billion in first 10 years…”Rep, Ryan indicates that this is illusory:
a. The bill double counts Medicare savings

b. And double counts increased taxes for Social Security

c. And double counts increased premiums for the CLASS (Community Living Assistance Services and Supports) Act, in which workers are stipulated to send a monthly premium in order to purchase coverage, usually via their employer. They need to pay into the program for five years at the very least in order to qualify for the benefits for the disabled, poor, or elderly people -which is believed to be least fifty dollars per day and assumed by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office to reach up to seventy-five dollars per day.

d. Without the ‘double count’ aspect, the bill actually results in a $460 billion deficit in the first 10 years and a $1.4 trillion deficit in the second ten years.

2. The double count aspect is explained as follows:

a. The bill raises taxes $ ½ billion and cuts Medicare $ ½ trillion during the first 10 years, but provides only six years of ‘benefits.’

b. While the extra money derives from the premiums for the new CLASS Act entitlement, but then these premiums are then also counted as deficit reduction.

c. And, while additional money in Social Security taxes is supposedly reserved to pay for Social Security benefits, it is also claimed in the bill to be a form of deficit reduction. So, why is it tapped as both payment for benefits, and as reducing costs?

d. The administration claims that all the Medicare cuts are to increase the solvency of Medicare, as a reserve for the program, but if this is so then it is unethical to use the ‘saved’ funds to create another government program.

3. CBO: “[the bill] would not cause a net increase in deficits in excess of $5 billion in any year of the four 10-year periods beginning after 2019.”

a. In the original version of the bill, members of labor unions would not have to pay taxes on “Cadillac” healthcare plans, a pay-back by Democrats to the unions- but everyone else who had to pay increased taxes on these plans, and this would pay most of the costs of the new healthcare ‘reform.’ When this became public news, the administration changed the proposal to this: everyone would pay said taxes, but not until 2018! But, of course, logic suggests that the Congress in existence eight years from now would not impose a $1 trillion tax that this Congress had not the nerve to impose.

b. A new unelected bureaucratic Commission would be in charge of Medicare, to ration care and wring out even more cuts than the $1/2 billion in the bill. If unable or unwilling to do this, of course, the CBO estimates are invalid.

c. The Chief Actuary in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in the Obama Health and Human Services department issued a memorandum stating that HR 3200, the basis for the President’s plan would increase healthcare costs by $ 234 billion over the first 10 years. Obama on Health Care: Half Right | Cato @ Liberty


And, of course, the '1099 Fix' the administration is scrambling to install admits that the bill will make it harder for small businesses to be profitable....i.e., to hire more workers.
"In addition to repeal, Sen. Debbie Stabenow has introduced an amendment to eliminate the 1099 reporting requirement, which passed in the health care bill. Congress has tried to eliminate this requirement numerous times in the past several months, as small businesses abhor the requirement that they send out 1099 forms on any vendor purchase of over $600. The requirement was put into health care to increase government revenue (basically by enforcing tax laws on the books), and Stabenow’s amendment replaces that revenue by rescinding unobligated funds in budgets other than defense, homeland security and the Social Security Administration. This is a real capitulation to Mike Johanns and the Republicans."
Health Care Repeal, 1099 Fix Votes Up Today | FDL News Desk

So the overriding principle, that the bill is an attempt to control, contol, control and grow government, grow government, and then...grow government....is clear to any thinking individual.

Rather than 'start the ball rolling,' you seem to have choked on it.

Next.

(But I like the shirt!)

Your post consists of:

- More sophistry from Representive Ryan's office on the budget numbers. Color me shocked. Misleading claims about accounting principles? Check. Completely making things up, like say, an increase in Social Security taxes? Check. "The bill won't save money because Congress will refuse to stick to hard choices made"? True, but it's equally true of his plan to gut Medicare by turning it into a massive handout for insurance companies.

- A statement that doesn't mean what you think it means. The statement by the actuary at CMS is about total healthcare cost, not about the impact on the deficit. Of course covering another 40 million people is going to increase aggregate healthcare costs.

So...that means, what?

That you couldn't dispute a single one of the statements?

Here are the parts I like:
"...Congress will refuse to stick to hard choices made"? True."

and

"Of course covering another 40 million people is going to increase aggregate healthcare costs."

Good work!


And, no 'thank you' re: the shirt??
Well, I never.....

 

[Polk]

What is there to dispute? Ryan pulled a bunch of numbers out of his ass without anything to back them up. The burden is on the one making the positive claim.

And please, expand on why you "like" those two statements.

 

[Toronado3800]

I believe it will cost us money as a nation. Less money than would be sucked out if we do not do this right. Economy of scale.

Just someday, someone (meaning most of us who have less than 10 million of liquid assests) will be unable to afford a 10k a dose pill that will extend our lives if taken three times daily. Worst part is we will know the pill exists and have to watch our mother, ourself, or our kid die a few years sooner because neither ourself or the nation can afford it.

Forcing everyone to pay into insurance puts off this day. It buys time for the medical research industry to quit focusing on wonder drugs and switch to finding ways to make existing treatments cheaper.

Immediately a properly implemented healthcare plan will cost little. In forty(???) years as costs rise premiums to fund it may be too much for the population as a whole to pay.