Is the rightwing still in denial over ObamaCare?

[peach174]

Here are some facts to consider:

1) There has not been a great cost to jobs
2) Employers aren't dumping healthcare plans en masse.
3) Because millions more now have health insurance, insurance companies and providers largely support the law.
4) If it passes the next Supreme Court ruling, it will become a pillar in the healthcare industry.
5) repubs still have jack shit to replace it with.

You realize that the bill has not been implemented yet for business and won't go into effect till 2017?

 

[JimH52]

So you feel it needs to be replaced? That must mean you are being disingenuous with items 1-4?

My my how you seek to lie.

Do your thoughts always proceed in a cyclical manner. Good Grief! You RWers are reaching the end of your rope, huh?

 

[Zoom-boing]

Senate GOP leaders have just endorsed a bill extending Obamacare subsidies through 2017.

Big government politicians are for big government. I said this while the whole unaca debate was going on. The Rs are just as bad as the Ds, dont' trust any of them. They suck.

 

[hortysir]

Senate GOP leaders have just endorsed a bill extending Obamacare subsidies through 2017.

Sorta held over a barrel at this point.
How many times have we heard "it's the law. Get over it".
It's the law to fund it.
You'd be crying like a baby if they didn't extend the subsidies

 

[Greenbeard]

Here are some facts to consider:

1) There has not been a great cost to jobs
2) Employers aren't dumping healthcare plans en masse.
3) Because millions more now have health insurance, insurance companies and providers largely support the law.
4) If it passes the next Supreme Court ruling, it will become a pillar in the healthcare industry.
5) repubs still have jack shit to replace it with.

You realize that the bill has not been implemented yet for business and won't go into effect till 2017?

The employer mandate has been in effect for businesses with >100 employees (i.e., the vast majority of employees it's ever going to effect) since last open enrollment period.

The fact that you didn't notice says all that needs to be said.

 

[peach174]

Here are some facts to consider:

1) There has not been a great cost to jobs
2) Employers aren't dumping healthcare plans en masse.
3) Because millions more now have health insurance, insurance companies and providers largely support the law.
4) If it passes the next Supreme Court ruling, it will become a pillar in the healthcare industry.
5) repubs still have jack shit to replace it with.

You realize that the bill has not been implemented yet for business and won't go into effect till 2017?

The employer mandate has been in effect for businesses with >100 employees (i.e., the vast majority of employees it's ever going to effect) since last open enrollment period.

The fact that you didn't notice says all that needs to be said.

Affordable Care Act Employer Mandate Delayed Until 2016 For Some Employers Martindale.com
The Obama administration has announced that the employer “play-or-pay” mandate portion of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will not be enforced for some employers until 2016.
In the latest announcement, the Obama administration delayed the deadline for compliance for mid-sized companies (50 to 99 full-time equivalents) will have until January 1, 2016.

In addition, the employer mandate for companies with 100 or more full-time equivalents, which is still effective as of January 1, 2015, will be less onerous. Those companies must offer insurance to only 70% of full-time employees in 2015. The previous requirement that companies offer insurance to 95% of full-time employees will not go into effect until 2016.

So it was 2016 not 2017 my mistake, but it is still delayed for some businesses.

 

[GreenBean]

Here are some facts to consider:

1) There has not been a great cost to jobs
2) Employers aren't dumping healthcare plans en masse.
3) Because millions more now have health insurance, insurance companies and providers largely support the law.
4) If it passes the next Supreme Court ruling, it will become a pillar in the healthcare industry.
5) repubs still have jack shit to replace it with.

1. "There has not been a great cost to jobs" --- Wholly unsubstantiated - there are no statistics available that accurately depict the effect of obamacare of the job market - the unemploy. rate swings up and down it its normal periodic spikes and valleys and no one can ascertain how high it woulda coulda shoulda gone without the burden of socialized medicine and poorly formulated governmental manipulation.

2." Employers aren't dumping healthcare plans en masse."

Perhaps you should wake up and smell the coffee - here's an article from Forbes that might titillate you a tad.

The End Of Employer-Provided Health Insurance - Forbes

 

[Greenbeard]

So it was 2016 not 2017 my mistake, but it is still delayed for some businesses.

Yet the number of people impacted (i.e., those working for employers with fewer than 100 employees) is small. Here's where we stand, based on SBA data on firm size and employment:

Firm size​	Total employment ​ in the U.S.​	Employer mandate​ status (2015)​
<50 employees​	31,253,896 (28%)​	N/A - never affects​
50-99 employees​	7,876,979 (7%)​	Not yet in effect (begins 2016)​
100 or more employees​	74,295,090 (66%)​	Currently in effect​

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

In other words, the employer mandate is currently delayed for businesses that collectively employ 7% of the workforce. The other 90%+ of the workforce is already there.

Even for that tiny sliver of the population next year doesn't mean all that much, since if their employer is currently buying a non-grandfathered fully insured product for them right now it already conforms with the ACA's requirements (which went into effect 1/1/2014).

The shoe you're expecting to drop already dropped. And it didn't even make a big enough impact for you to notice.

 

[MisterBeale]

So you feel it needs to be replaced? That must mean you are being disingenuous with items 1-4?

My my how you seek to lie.

Do your thoughts always proceed in a cyclical manner. Good Grief! You RWers are reaching the end of your rope, huh?

Why do you label me a "RWinger?" You have no clue as to where I stand on issues. Seriously. Wait until a "Republican" gets elected. Then the RW's will all be calling me a radical. This is insane. People judging w/o knowing.


Just because I am one of the few people on this board that recognizes that elites are just elites, and they really don't give a shit about the voters, the only thing they care about is who butters their bread, does NOT make me a "RWinger." Damn, you are so obtuse.

It is government and control over YOUR LIFE that is the problem. In the sixties, I would have been a foot loose and free hippie. An anarchist is an anarchist. Bureaucratic hierarchy, and men in suits telling YOU what to think is the problem. Stop goose stepping and assuming these insurance corporations, big pharma and Monsanto have your best interests at heart. They don't! Christ you statists can be so obtuse. Call me a liberal, call me a RWinger, it makes no difference, you are being ignorant b/c you can't think outside of the box, you are stuck in a straight jacket you are quite content to wear.

​

You never saw the movie "They Live, huh?" He wasn't from the left or the right. He was just awake silly.




As far as me seeing right through a lying and desperate post, sorry I pissed your off. If being critical of me for seeing it, and launching an ad hominem attack is the best you can do when I make you feel uncomfortable with your tenuous and lousy positions, well sorry. Well, no, I take that back. If folks keep throttling people like you, maybe you will wake the hell up.

 

[emilynghiem]

Here are some facts to consider:

1) There has not been a great cost to jobs
2) Employers aren't dumping healthcare plans en masse.
3) Because millions more now have health insurance, insurance companies and providers largely support the law.
4) If it passes the next Supreme Court ruling, it will become a pillar in the healthcare industry.
5) repubs still have jack shit to replace it with.

1) Just a major reduction in the number of hours

2) Just switching to crappier plans

3) The evil insurance companies are the ones benefiting the most
4) IF a frog had wings.....

5) Republicans DO have a plan. Google is your friend

Dear hortysir: If people from left and right don't believe in each other's plans,
and don't agree which is the ONLY WAY: "insurance" "govt health care" "singlepayer" or "free market"

How is that much different from people of different FAITHS
not agreeing what is the RIGHT way or ONLY WAY to get to salvation, God or heaven?

Isn't this equally FAITH BASED.

If so, what in the Constitution gives the FEDERAL GOVT authority
to FORCE people to BELIEVE pay for and follow ONE WAY?
And PENALIZE the other ways as "not a choice"; how is that NOT like
fining or banning a religion, if people BELIEVE in another way of covering for health care?

None of this is proven. BOTH sides are arguing based on what they BELIEVE
will work or not work. Isn't that like people arguing one religion works and the others are wrong?

How is this any different from Atheists arguing that science and secularism is THE ONLY WAY to establish truth, and religions should be kept out of govt; while Christians and Theists believe truth is faith-based which by its nature requires FREE WILL and free choice to accept, and this comes from God not from Govt.

The common factor is nobody wants to pay for free loaders who refuse to follow THEIR plan.
Fine. So why not make THAT the law?
That nobody can impose their health care costs on any person who doesn't agree to cover them, and everybody has to sign for financial and legal responsibility for their costs or sign up for a plan/group that will register them as a member for coverage.

BUT LEAVE THE COVERAGE TERMS AND MANDATES UP TO THE ORGANIZATION TO DECIDE FOR ITS MEMBERS. KEEP THE TERMS AND MANDATES OPTIONAL WHERE EACH TRACK AND ITS MEMBERS DECIDE THEIR OWN TERMS

Just like religions, where people get to CHOOSE which way they think is the right way or only way to go.

Gee Whiz. Why can't we see and treat secular beliefs equally as religious beliefs.

Clearly these are just as engrained in people's beliefs as religions are.
Why not respect the paths and ways that people NATURALLY believe in,
and quit trying to dictate something else through govt which is against the Constitution anyway.

Why can't we see and AGREE that's what's going on here???

Is it really so difficult to see that since people DON'T agree, and DON'T believe the same things, then don't force govt to dictate this for people. Especially without any proof, and without them CONSENTING to follow, just like religion.

Trying to force BELIEFS about health care, and what will work for which people, is as WRONG as Govt dictating what religion people should believe, fund and follow. With the mandates that exempt some ways and penalize others, and with govt RESTRICTIONS on which religious groups qualify for exemptions, this is govt regulating religion and discriminating on the basis of creed. Why can't we agree this is going on? Is it really that hard to take one step back from these conflicts, and agree that we don't agree because we don't believe in the same approaches. Just like how atheists and theists do not see things the same way, and can't be forced to fund the programs run by the other group.

How can Govt force and fine people who believe in different things?