GOP still spreading lies

Then this sort of becomes the Ship of Theseus puzzle of insurance policies: how many pieces can you alter and replace before it comes something else? I don't know if they have any Greek philosophers over in HHS but someone has to decide where to draw the line. And they've done that (they actually just relaxed the requirements a bit this week through an amendment to the original regulations). Someone people won't like it, though I haven't seen too many alternate suggestions (to go with the gripes) as to where that line should be drawn.
You have a link where I can read up on that?
Not doubting ya, just have several tabs running right now being a football weekend!!

Right from the horse's mouth: Amendment to Regulation on "Grandfathered" Health Plans under the Affordable Care Act.
 
Your point? This has to do with the continuous fearmongering regarding health insurance promulgated by Republicans. Obviously you didn't bother to read the information. You didn't have time.

Why bother? you think democrats don't lie and spread fear?

IF I wanted to talk generalities, I would have put this in the Politics forum. Once again, this has to do with all the lies about health care.

And you claimed only Republicans did so, meaning the partisan spin is YOURS.
 
Then this sort of becomes the Ship of Theseus puzzle of insurance policies: how many pieces can you alter and replace before it comes something else? I don't know if they have any Greek philosophers over in HHS but someone has to decide where to draw the line. And they've done that (they actually just relaxed the requirements a bit this week through an amendment to the original regulations). Someone people won't like it, though I haven't seen too many alternate suggestions (to go with the gripes) as to where that line should be drawn.
You have a link where I can read up on that?
Not doubting ya, just have several tabs running right now being a football weekend!!

Right from the horse's mouth: Amendment to Regulation on "Grandfathered" Health Plans under the Affordable Care Act.
Thanks for that.

It's the last sentence, here, that worries me:
What types of plans does this affect?
The amendment affects insured group health plans.
A change of issuers in the individual market would still result in the loss of grandfathered status.
 
Both sides spread lies.....

Sure they do, post some of the lies from the left, with detail, and not from NewsCorp or the lips of Limbaugh.
But first consider, all elected and wannabe elected officials 'lie'. The great difference is, the Republicans need to lie because they only represent the business class. Without lies they would never get a majority vote.

I'll get right on that, Karl Marx.

Of course you won't, bull shitters simply move on to bull shit anew. You, Rabbi, CrusaderFrank, Revere, Stephanie, et al buy and sell the propaganda of the new right ad nauseum, and repeat the same lies, half-truths and unproven theories as if considered thought framed your posts. Your posts Elvis are simply bleats from the herd.
A great example is your Karl Marx idiotgram, those who don't hold fast to your ideology (infered from this post) must be (pick your pejorative) Commies or Socialists or Marxists. The world is not all black or all white except in the mind of a concrete thinker - and that be you and 'your kind'.
 
I work with HR Mangers on a daily basis. Most of them are saying quite clearly that the penalties imposed by the new law on employers for not providing health care insurance are less costly than providing healthcare insurance.

...this surprises them?

To quote from Mercer's press release from earlier this month:

While employers are encouraged to offer coverage under the new health care reform rules, they can choose not to and (starting in 2014) pay a penalty that may be less than what they currently spend on health benefits.

In a survey released today by consulting firm Mercer, employers were asked how likely they are to get out of the business of providing health care once state-run insurance exchanges become operational in 2014 and make it easier for individuals to buy coverage. For the great majority, the answer was “not likely.”

The survey results, a preview of findings from Mercer’s 2010 National Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Plans to be announced later this month, will be released today at Mercer’s inaugural Innovation Conversation webcast, which begins at 3 p.m. Eastern Time (click on the following link to register: “True Health Care Reform through Innovation”). More than 2,800 employers participated in the annual survey, now in its 25th year.

Survey responses vary by employer size. Large employers remain committed to their role of health plan sponsor. Just 6% of all employers with 500 or more employees – and just 3% of those with 10,000 or more – say they are likely to terminate their health plans and have employees seek coverage in the individual market after 2014 (Fig. 1).

Employers have never been required to offer coverage. They do so to promote a healthy, productive workforce and to attract and retain employees, who place a high value on health coverage because it can be expensive to purchase as an individual and, especially for those with health problems, difficult to obtain.

“Employers are reluctant to lose control over a key employee benefit,” said Tracy Watts, a Partner in Mercer’s Washington, DC, office. “But beyond that, once you consider the penalty, the loss of tax savings and grossing up employee income so they can purchase comparable coverage through an exchange, for many employers dropping coverage may not equate to savings.”​

It's encouraging to see many businesses returning to the attitude of without a work force with high morale, the business will suffer. For far too long, employers have been calling the shots, reading only the proverbial bottom line, and dismissing the fact that if it were not for worker productivity, they would not be in business for long. In my opinion, it's one of the reasons the US can no longer effectively compete in a gobal market. They forgot that it's the sides of the mountain that sustain growth, not the top.

cool, like the government?
 
Both sides spread lies.....
Sure they do, post some of the lies from the left, with detail, and not from NewsCorp or the lips of Limbaugh.
:lol::lol::lol:

post some lies from the right....and I don't care where you get them, the comedy value alone should be worth it.......

But first consider, all elected and wannabe elected officials 'lie'. The great difference is, the Republicans need to lie because they only represent the business class. Without lies they would never get a majority vote.

:lol: you mean like obama admitting hes a progressive liberal?
 
Why bother? you think democrats don't lie and spread fear?

IF I wanted to talk generalities, I would have put this in the Politics forum. Once again, this has to do with all the lies about health care.

And you claimed only Republicans did so, meaning the partisan spin is YOURS.

The factcheck.org link in the OP was only about Republicans. I had no comment other than the way the title of the thread was composed.
 

the article says;

The new law has brought increases for some. But GOP leaders exaggerate.

your title says they have lied....which is it? :eusa_eh:

:lol: I guess it depends on whom one is referring to whether or not it is called a "lie." As I recall, righties claim Obama "lied" about the number of unemployed; he "lied" about closing Gitmo; he "lied" about [fill in blank]. Let me know when you can distinguish whether a "lie" is really no more than a wish or a projection, or whether blatant embellishment of fact is, in fact, a "lie."

em·bel·lish·ment   –noun

1. an ornament or decoration.
2. a fictitious addition, as to a factual statement.
3. Music .

Dictionary.com Unabridged
 
...this surprises them?

To quote from Mercer's press release from earlier this month:

While employers are encouraged to offer coverage under the new health care reform rules, they can choose not to and (starting in 2014) pay a penalty that may be less than what they currently spend on health benefits.

In a survey released today by consulting firm Mercer, employers were asked how likely they are to get out of the business of providing health care once state-run insurance exchanges become operational in 2014 and make it easier for individuals to buy coverage. For the great majority, the answer was “not likely.”

The survey results, a preview of findings from Mercer’s 2010 National Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Plans to be announced later this month, will be released today at Mercer’s inaugural Innovation Conversation webcast, which begins at 3 p.m. Eastern Time (click on the following link to register: “True Health Care Reform through Innovation”). More than 2,800 employers participated in the annual survey, now in its 25th year.

Survey responses vary by employer size. Large employers remain committed to their role of health plan sponsor. Just 6% of all employers with 500 or more employees – and just 3% of those with 10,000 or more – say they are likely to terminate their health plans and have employees seek coverage in the individual market after 2014 (Fig. 1).

Employers have never been required to offer coverage. They do so to promote a healthy, productive workforce and to attract and retain employees, who place a high value on health coverage because it can be expensive to purchase as an individual and, especially for those with health problems, difficult to obtain.

“Employers are reluctant to lose control over a key employee benefit,” said Tracy Watts, a Partner in Mercer’s Washington, DC, office. “But beyond that, once you consider the penalty, the loss of tax savings and grossing up employee income so they can purchase comparable coverage through an exchange, for many employers dropping coverage may not equate to savings.”​

It's encouraging to see many businesses returning to the attitude of without a work force with high morale, the business will suffer. For far too long, employers have been calling the shots, reading only the proverbial bottom line, and dismissing the fact that if it were not for worker productivity, they would not be in business for long. In my opinion, it's one of the reasons the US can no longer effectively compete in a gobal market. They forgot that it's the sides of the mountain that sustain growth, not the top.

cool, like the government?

Beyond your comprehension, I guess. Sad.
 

the article says;

The new law has brought increases for some. But GOP leaders exaggerate.

your title says they have lied....which is it? :eusa_eh:

:lol: I guess it depends on whom one is referring to whether or not it is called a "lie." As I recall, righties claim Obama "lied" about the number of unemployed; he "lied" about closing Gitmo; he "lied" about [fill in blank].

all true. that's been said by the right. And I see your point, he may have promised to do something then not fulfilled it, that's not a lie.


Let me know when you can distinguish whether a "lie" is really no more than a wish or a projection, or whether blatant embellishment of fact is, in fact, a "lie."

let me know when you can distinguish the difference between beating them than joining them. ;)
 
Last edited:
the article says;



your title says they have lied....which is it? :eusa_eh:

:lol: I guess it depends on whom one is referring to whether or not it is called a "lie." As I recall, righties claim Obama "lied" about the number of unemployed; he "lied" about closing Gitmo; he "lied" about [fill in blank].

all true. that's been said by the right. And I see your point, he may have promised to do something then not fulfilled it, that's not a lie.


Let me know when you can distinguish whether a "lie" is really no more than a wish or a projection, or whether blatant embellishment of fact is, in fact, a "lie."

let me know when you decide that beating them is better than joining them. ;)

You'd have to define "them." The current batch will never have my support.
 
It's encouraging to see many businesses returning to the attitude of without a work force with high morale, the business will suffer. For far too long, employers have been calling the shots, reading only the proverbial bottom line, and dismissing the fact that if it were not for worker productivity, they would not be in business for long. In my opinion, it's one of the reasons the US can no longer effectively compete in a gobal market. They forgot that it's the sides of the mountain that sustain growth, not the top.

cool, like the government?

Beyond your comprehension, I guess. Sad.

not at all, the gov 'creates' job...right?
 
:lol: I guess it depends on whom one is referring to whether or not it is called a "lie." As I recall, righties claim Obama "lied" about the number of unemployed; he "lied" about closing Gitmo; he "lied" about [fill in blank].

all true. that's been said by the right. And I see your point, he may have promised to do something then not fulfilled it, that's not a lie.


Let me know when you can distinguish whether a "lie" is really no more than a wish or a projection, or whether blatant embellishment of fact is, in fact, a "lie."

let me know when you decide that beating them is better than joining them. ;)

You'd have to define "them." The current batch will never have my support.

the ones you joined in doing exactly the same thing you accused them, and me of.
 

Forum List

Back
Top