If Obamacare is so great why are there no insurers backing it and

[Vandalshandle]

how does Obamacare work without insurers

When you figure this out, let Obama know because he has no idea

Before Obamacare, there weren't insurers in counties where few people lived. Duh! Do you guys practice stupid?
No major piece of legislation has ever been perfect the first time. They ALWAYS take tweaks to get them right. Duh! How can you not know that?
It was because of Obamacare that millions had healthcare for the first fucking time. Duh!
If you guys really care, then do something to get insurers into rural areas. Duh!

The right wingers. Determined to be the most ignorant people in the world.

you said:

"It was because of Obamacare that millions had healthcare for the first fucking time."

that statement alone shows the magnitude of your ignorance. before ACA no one in the USA was denied medical care. NO ONE, even those here illegally. Those of us who paid covered the cost of those who could not or would not pay.

having insurance that has a monthly premium of $1000 and a deductible of $5000 means that you pay $17000 out of pocket before the insurance company pays anything. Do you somehow think that is better than what we had before?

the entire left wing argument on this is based on lies.

Before ACA, if you got a diagnosis of cancer, and you had no insurance, you probably died. ER rooms were only obligated to stabilize you, not cure you. Doctors have never been big on operating for free.

 

[danielpalos]

I took a short cut to the end of your rant after the first two sentences. I have been hearing all the same arguments about Medicare, and how it is going to collapse, since 1965, and I am sure that there is nothing new that you can add. Of course, this is the way it is done in every other industrialized nation on earth, as well.

As I have likewise heard all the angles and excuses over how liberals believe single payer or Medicare expansion that's covers ALL Americans, especially welfare recipients, can be more cost effective and solvent. You haven't proven that at all, nor an explaination on how you believe government will cover the cost. Cost is the underlining issue that you obviously have a hard time with confronting when asked, The same can be said of those who believe social security is the same as it always has been and that funding is not really an issue. Those individuals end up being the very same people who didn't really know how our government set up the program in order to help those retirees in the FIRST place. You really should just go back to your insurance desk, since it's pretty evident that finances is not your forte.

Oh I get it another MBA that reads from the book, no practical experience or common sense. I've seen a lot of you in my long career that because something says such and such in a book this is how it should be.

bottom line: medical care is not free, someone has to pay. you libs say "just let the government pay for all of us". So I ask you, where does the government get its money? Do you have any idea? From us-----either via income taxes, or corporate taxes that are included in everything we buy.

End the drug war to pay for it.

There are many ways to pay for it without touching our pockets but the right can't get their heads out of their asses long enough to figure that out. Yes, legalize marijuana and tax it, legalize online gambling and tax it or better yet a national sales tax on everything and I mean everything purchased. This way everyone will pay their fair share of taxes, illegals, people working under the table, etc. There are ways.

Oh the sales tax is not over and above what we're paying now I mean to get of fed taxes.

The right wing prefers to be mostly all talk and mostly no action and nothing but repeal; should left wing women "harass" right wing men, about "being worthless in the non-porn sector?"

 

[Vandalshandle]

I've been posting on this board since 2013 that the only way this country can have sustainable health coverage for all is through expanding Medicare to cover all citizens. My insurance career began in June, 1965, one month before Medicare went into effect, and endured for 15 years of hearing the RW scream that we were under a commie takeover and that it would fail, before they gave up. .I can't really be blamed if you have not been paying attention. Anything less will result in adverse selection and spiraling loss ratios. It really is that simple.

It's not sustainable. For one, when you say for ALL citizens you are also speaking of those who live off welfare with many who choose not to work. We already have an accruing debt which includes those who never contribute as responsible members of society. What you are purposing is irresponsible healthcare. Irresponsible meaning one where you speak of government handing out all these great "gifts" which sounds appealing on the surface but, when it comes to those little details of how exactly do you make such a dream wish financially sustainable and sound, is too often not thought through very well. Government has the same problem of sustainability with social security, which has this way of being revisited as a hot issue with every other election cycle, a battle between the problem of coverage and cost. In fact I can't find anyone who can name ONE government program that does not have cost problems, and not one that is proven to run more efficiently than the private sector ... not one. Now, like most everything else that surrounds these leftwing ideas of government entitlements, they simply use the familiar default excuse of "the rich will just pay for it'. This the rich will just have to [again] pay their increasing share, basically speaks of a plan where the details have not been thought out so they look to blow them off and brush it aside. Now, in this case, having the government completely take over healthcare with the "rich paying for it" is ...by definition... speaking of socialized medicine.

You see we have the usual promises the liberal democrats try to sell us on tthrough this fantasy of: let government be the parent holding the credit card and we'll just give you what you need. Only to later see those promises being broken in one of three ways - 1) premiums rising .. 2) reduction in coverage ... 3) government costs accruing like a snowball on our national debt. Democrats thought government can do a better job when they passed Obamacare, and it didn't take 8 years to see the consequence of less providers to offer insurance, resulting in a rise to premiums when insurers are left to cover the weight of an increase in the gap of coverages remaining, and cost STILL causing yet another government program to slip in increasing revenue problems from an inability to be self sustaining.

Massachusetts Health Care had the problem of battling the issues of increasing costs associated with care.
California failed to come up with a single payer system for their state, over the issue to cover costs.
Obamacare is collapsing due to a need for health care demand but a growing problem of costs.
NHS has to limit what treatments they will allow and cover, while they still battle over covering its British citizens over costs.
Canada has chosen to allow private insurers as a means to try and lower procedural wait times and battle costs.

Do we see a common thread that every case, which chooses to allow government control of healthcare, faces? It will be the same problem surrounding Medicare expansion for ALL Americans (which include those on a consistent, ongoing, welfare problem of growing government financial dependency).

I took a short cut to the end of your rant after the first two sentences. I have been hearing all the same arguments about Medicare, and how it is going to collapse, since 1965, and I am sure that there is nothing new that you can add. Of course, this is the way it is done in every other industrialized nation on earth, as well.

As I have likewise heard all the angles and excuses over how liberals believe single payer or Medicare expansion that's covers ALL Americans, especially welfare recipients, can be more cost effective and solvent. You haven't proven that at all, nor an explaination on how you believe government will cover the cost. Cost is the underlining issue that you obviously have a hard time with confronting when asked, The same can be said of those who believe social security is the same as it always has been and that funding is not really an issue. Those individuals end up being the very same people who didn't really know how our government set up the program in order to help those retirees in the FIRST place. You really should just go back to your insurance desk, since it's pretty evident that finances is not your forte.

Oh I get it another MBA that reads from the book, no practical experience or common sense. I've seen a lot of you in my long career that because something says such and such in a book this is how it should be.

bottom line: medical care is not free, someone has to pay. you libs say "just let the government pay for all of us". So I ask you, where does the government get its money? Do you have any idea? From us-----either via income taxes, or corporate taxes that are included in everything we buy.

I have been paying for my Medicare coverage out of every paycheck I have earned since 1965, and frankly, I did not even miss the money. I would have had no problem paying more for universal coverage out of every paycheck, and it would have been partially offset by not having my employer deduct my share of health insurance premium out of my check.

 

[debbiedowner]

how does Obamacare work without insurers

When you figure this out, let Obama know because he has no idea

Before Obamacare, there weren't insurers in counties where few people lived. Duh! Do you guys practice stupid?
No major piece of legislation has ever been perfect the first time. They ALWAYS take tweaks to get them right. Duh! How can you not know that?
It was because of Obamacare that millions had healthcare for the first fucking time. Duh!
If you guys really care, then do something to get insurers into rural areas. Duh!

The right wingers. Determined to be the most ignorant people in the world.

You know 4 years have made me forget, you're right not all counties had insurers and some just had one.

 

[debbiedowner]

It's not sustainable. For one, when you say for ALL citizens you are also speaking of those who live off welfare with many who choose not to work. We already have an accruing debt which includes those who never contribute as responsible members of society. What you are purposing is irresponsible healthcare. Irresponsible meaning one where you speak of government handing out all these great "gifts" which sounds appealing on the surface but, when it comes to those little details of how exactly do you make such a dream wish financially sustainable and sound, is too often not thought through very well. Government has the same problem of sustainability with social security, which has this way of being revisited as a hot issue with every other election cycle, a battle between the problem of coverage and cost. In fact I can't find anyone who can name ONE government program that does not have cost problems, and not one that is proven to run more efficiently than the private sector ... not one. Now, like most everything else that surrounds these leftwing ideas of government entitlements, they simply use the familiar default excuse of "the rich will just pay for it'. This the rich will just have to [again] pay their increasing share, basically speaks of a plan where the details have not been thought out so they look to blow them off and brush it aside. Now, in this case, having the government completely take over healthcare with the "rich paying for it" is ...by definition... speaking of socialized medicine.

You see we have the usual promises the liberal democrats try to sell us on tthrough this fantasy of: let government be the parent holding the credit card and we'll just give you what you need. Only to later see those promises being broken in one of three ways - 1) premiums rising .. 2) reduction in coverage ... 3) government costs accruing like a snowball on our national debt. Democrats thought government can do a better job when they passed Obamacare, and it didn't take 8 years to see the consequence of less providers to offer insurance, resulting in a rise to premiums when insurers are left to cover the weight of an increase in the gap of coverages remaining, and cost STILL causing yet another government program to slip in increasing revenue problems from an inability to be self sustaining.

Massachusetts Health Care had the problem of battling the issues of increasing costs associated with care.
California failed to come up with a single payer system for their state, over the issue to cover costs.
Obamacare is collapsing due to a need for health care demand but a growing problem of costs.
NHS has to limit what treatments they will allow and cover, while they still battle over covering its British citizens over costs.
Canada has chosen to allow private insurers as a means to try and lower procedural wait times and battle costs.

Do we see a common thread that every case, which chooses to allow government control of healthcare, faces? It will be the same problem surrounding Medicare expansion for ALL Americans (which include those on a consistent, ongoing, welfare problem of growing government financial dependency).

I took a short cut to the end of your rant after the first two sentences. I have been hearing all the same arguments about Medicare, and how it is going to collapse, since 1965, and I am sure that there is nothing new that you can add. Of course, this is the way it is done in every other industrialized nation on earth, as well.

As I have likewise heard all the angles and excuses over how liberals believe single payer or Medicare expansion that's covers ALL Americans, especially welfare recipients, can be more cost effective and solvent. You haven't proven that at all, nor an explaination on how you believe government will cover the cost. Cost is the underlining issue that you obviously have a hard time with confronting when asked, The same can be said of those who believe social security is the same as it always has been and that funding is not really an issue. Those individuals end up being the very same people who didn't really know how our government set up the program in order to help those retirees in the FIRST place. You really should just go back to your insurance desk, since it's pretty evident that finances is not your forte.

Oh I get it another MBA that reads from the book, no practical experience or common sense. I've seen a lot of you in my long career that because something says such and such in a book this is how it should be.

bottom line: medical care is not free, someone has to pay. you libs say "just let the government pay for all of us". So I ask you, where does the government get its money? Do you have any idea? From us-----either via income taxes, or corporate taxes that are included in everything we buy.

I have been paying for my Medicare coverage out of every paycheck I have earned since 1965, and frankly, I did not even miss the money. I would have had no problem paying more for universal coverage out of every paycheck, and it would have been partially offset by not having my employer deduct my share of health insurance premium out of my check.

A 1% hike in payroll taxes ought to do it.

But I am not pushing for Medicare for all. I think 50 or 55+ for Medicare and under would go back to the old way of underwriting with cheaper plans and if one was declined they could buy into Medicare. Only if declined. If an exclusionary rider was placed on the policy for a body part so be it, it would come off would when you reached either 50 or 55 and could get Medicare. At the same time raise full retirement age to 70.

 

[deanrd]

how does Obamacare work without insurers

When you figure this out, let Obama know because he has no idea

Before Obamacare, there weren't insurers in counties where few people lived. Duh! Do you guys practice stupid?
No major piece of legislation has ever been perfect the first time. They ALWAYS take tweaks to get them right. Duh! How can you not know that?
It was because of Obamacare that millions had healthcare for the first fucking time. Duh!
If you guys really care, then do something to get insurers into rural areas. Duh!

The right wingers. Determined to be the most ignorant people in the world.

You know 4 years have made me forget, you're right not all counties had insurers and some just had one.

You can tell which counties didn't have insurance before Obamacare. It's those where insurers are pulling out.

 

[Redfish]

Is that why you can't come up with any legislation or bill enacted through Congress that has effectively been able to lower healthcare costs and premiums? Obviously Senator Kennedy felt that government needed to step in and Congress established the HMO Act, because HE felt the government could do a better job at making healthcare more "cost effective". I've provided my facts, so what exactly has kept you from showing us how much more effective our government can be? Evidently you can't think outside of your own resume.

I've been posting on this board since 2013 that the only way this country can have sustainable health coverage for all is through expanding Medicare to cover all citizens. My insurance career began in June, 1965, one month before Medicare went into effect, and endured for 15 years of hearing the RW scream that we were under a commie takeover and that it would fail, before they gave up. .I can't really be blamed if you have not been paying attention. Anything less will result in adverse selection and spiraling loss ratios. It really is that simple.

It's not sustainable. For one, when you say for ALL citizens you are also speaking of those who live off welfare with many who choose not to work. We already have an accruing debt which includes those who never contribute as responsible members of society. What you are purposing is irresponsible healthcare. Irresponsible meaning one where you speak of government handing out all these great "gifts" which sounds appealing on the surface but, when it comes to those little details of how exactly do you make such a dream wish financially sustainable and sound, is too often not thought through very well. Government has the same problem of sustainability with social security, which has this way of being revisited as a hot issue with every other election cycle, a battle between the problem of coverage and cost. In fact I can't find anyone who can name ONE government program that does not have cost problems, and not one that is proven to run more efficiently than the private sector ... not one. Now, like most everything else that surrounds these leftwing ideas of government entitlements, they simply use the familiar default excuse of "the rich will just pay for it'. This the rich will just have to [again] pay their increasing share, basically speaks of a plan where the details have not been thought out so they look to blow them off and brush it aside. Now, in this case, having the government completely take over healthcare with the "rich paying for it" is ...by definition... speaking of socialized medicine.

You see we have the usual promises the liberal democrats try to sell us on tthrough this fantasy of: let government be the parent holding the credit card and we'll just give you what you need. Only to later see those promises being broken in one of three ways - 1) premiums rising .. 2) reduction in coverage ... 3) government costs accruing like a snowball on our national debt. Democrats thought government can do a better job when they passed Obamacare, and it didn't take 8 years to see the consequence of less providers to offer insurance, resulting in a rise to premiums when insurers are left to cover the weight of an increase in the gap of coverages remaining, and cost STILL causing yet another government program to slip in increasing revenue problems from an inability to be self sustaining.

Massachusetts Health Care had the problem of battling the issues of increasing costs associated with care.
California failed to come up with a single payer system for their state, over the issue to cover costs.
Obamacare is collapsing due to a need for health care demand but a growing problem of costs.
NHS has to limit what treatments they will allow and cover, while they still battle over covering its British citizens over costs.
Canada has chosen to allow private insurers as a means to try and lower procedural wait times and battle costs.

Do we see a common thread that every case, which chooses to allow government control of healthcare, faces? It will be the same problem surrounding Medicare expansion for ALL Americans (which include those on a consistent, ongoing, welfare problem of growing government financial dependency).

I took a short cut to the end of your rant after the first two sentences. I have been hearing all the same arguments about Medicare, and how it is going to collapse, since 1965, and I am sure that there is nothing new that you can add. Of course, this is the way it is done in every other industrialized nation on earth, as well.

As I have likewise heard all the angles and excuses over how liberals believe single payer or Medicare expansion that's covers ALL Americans, especially welfare recipients, can be more cost effective and solvent. You haven't proven that at all, nor an explaination on how you believe government will cover the cost. Cost is the underlining issue that you obviously have a hard time with confronting when asked, The same can be said of those who believe social security is the same as it always has been and that funding is not really an issue. Those individuals end up being the very same people who didn't really know how our government set up the program in order to help those retirees in the FIRST place. You really should just go back to your insurance desk, since it's pretty evident that finances is not your forte.

How many dead are OK with you? And who should they be? What part of the country? How many children? What to do with the disabled and the elderly?

Please, give us your detailed plan. We all look forward to it.

there are as many uninsured today as before ACA. Those that have insurance are paying higher premiums and higher deductibles than they were before ACA. It fixed nothing, just changed the demographics of the uninsured and created a new class of underinsured.

 

[Redfish]

how does Obamacare work without insurers

When you figure this out, let Obama know because he has no idea

Before Obamacare, there weren't insurers in counties where few people lived. Duh! Do you guys practice stupid?
No major piece of legislation has ever been perfect the first time. They ALWAYS take tweaks to get them right. Duh! How can you not know that?
It was because of Obamacare that millions had healthcare for the first fucking time. Duh!
If you guys really care, then do something to get insurers into rural areas. Duh!

The right wingers. Determined to be the most ignorant people in the world.

You know 4 years have made me forget, you're right not all counties had insurers and some just had one.

You can tell which counties didn't have insurance before Obamacare. It's those where insurers are pulling out.

and the ones that still have it have doubled their premiums and deductibles. How is that better?

 

[Redfish]

Obamacare is dead, it failed. Hopefully the GOP will come up with something better. It would be nice if the dems helped, but they wont because its all about party and they don't give a shit about the American people.

 

[deanrd]

Obamacare is dead, it failed. Hopefully the GOP will come up with something better. It would be nice if the dems helped, but they wont because its all about party and they don't give a shit about the American people.

It's not failed dum dum. Why do you think people are desperate to fight for it. White wingers hate Obama, not healthcare. And he's gone.What's been happening is that the GOP has been sabotaging it. They own it now.

 

[Bassman007]

Obamacare is dead, it failed. Hopefully the GOP will come up with something better. It would be nice if the dems helped, but they wont because its all about party and they don't give a shit about the American people.

Obamacare is still alive, but failing. The GOP Senators who will not pass a replacement are going to help Obamacare kill the Democratic party

 

[Vandalshandle]

Obamacare is dead, it failed. Hopefully the GOP will come up with something better. It would be nice if the dems helped, but they wont because its all about party and they don't give a shit about the American people.

Obamacare is still alive, but failing. The GOP Senators who will not pass a replacement are going to help Obamacare kill the Democratic party

Interesting twist, Bass. I suspect that you have a diploma from Trump U!

 

[Redfish]

Obamacare is dead, it failed. Hopefully the GOP will come up with something better. It would be nice if the dems helped, but they wont because its all about party and they don't give a shit about the American people.

Obamacare is still alive, but failing. The GOP Senators who will not pass a replacement are going to help Obamacare kill the Democratic party

while idiots like Schumer and Pelosi celebrate and claim victory. The stupidity of these people is amazing. They are determined to support a failed program simply because their party passed it. dumb and dumber

 

[Bassman007]

Obamacare is dead, it failed. Hopefully the GOP will come up with something better. It would be nice if the dems helped, but they wont because its all about party and they don't give a shit about the American people.

Obamacare is still alive, but failing. The GOP Senators who will not pass a replacement are going to help Obamacare kill the Democratic party

Interesting twist, Bass. I suspect that you have a diploma from Trump U!

Nope, I have no degrees at all, but I have got bushels of apples.................

Next idiot

 

[danielpalos]

So, where is the right wing health care plan?

 

[dblack]

The stupidity of these people is amazing. They are determined to support a failed program simply because their party passed it. dumb and dumber

Which party are you talking about here? Nevermind, it doesn't matter. TOTALLY AGREE!

 

[Vandalshandle]

Obamacare is dead, it failed. Hopefully the GOP will come up with something better. It would be nice if the dems helped, but they wont because its all about party and they don't give a shit about the American people.

Obamacare is still alive, but failing. The GOP Senators who will not pass a replacement are going to help Obamacare kill the Democratic party

Interesting twist, Bass. I suspect that you have a diploma from Trump U!

Nope, I have no degrees at all, but I have got bushels of apples.................

Next idiot

Trump has intentionally failed to get any legislation passed by congress in 6 months. It is all part of his master plan to show America that the democratic party obstructs everything he does, so that it will kill the democratic party!!!!!!!!

 

[Redfish]

Obamacare is dead, it failed. Hopefully the GOP will come up with something better. It would be nice if the dems helped, but they wont because its all about party and they don't give a shit about the American people.

Obamacare is still alive, but failing. The GOP Senators who will not pass a replacement are going to help Obamacare kill the Democratic party

Interesting twist, Bass. I suspect that you have a diploma from Trump U!

Nope, I have no degrees at all, but I have got bushels of apples.................

Next idiot

Trump has intentionally failed to get any legislation passed by congress in 6 months. It is all part of his master plan to show America that the democratic party obstructs everything he does, so that it will kill the democratic party!!!!!!!!

the dem party is killing itself. With spokespersons like Maxine Waters, Al Franken, Pelosi, and fauxahontas, its amazing that there is anything left of it.

 

[ChrisL]

Better Question than the OPs:

If Obamacare is so great, why did Democrat Politicians Un-Constututionally exempt themselves from their own edict / law?

Because they are the only ones who got to keep their insurance if they liked it. Lol.

 

[ChrisL]

Obamacare is dead, it failed. Hopefully the GOP will come up with something better. It would be nice if the dems helped, but they wont because its all about party and they don't give a shit about the American people.

Obamacare is still alive, but failing. The GOP Senators who will not pass a replacement are going to help Obamacare kill the Democratic party

Interesting twist, Bass. I suspect that you have a diploma from Trump U!

Nope, I have no degrees at all, but I have got bushels of apples.................

Next idiot

Trump has intentionally failed to get any legislation passed by congress in 6 months. It is all part of his master plan to show America that the democratic party obstructs everything he does, so that it will kill the democratic party!!!!!!!!

the dem party is killing itself. With spokespersons like Maxine Waters, Al Franken, Pelosi, and fauxahontas, its amazing that there is anything left of it.

I see the democrat party as having been hijacked by extremists, creeps and crazy people.