"Republicans finally admit there is no Benghazi scandal"

[Oldstyle]

You don't have the faintest idea what's in the ACA...do you?

If you are asking if I have intimate knowledge of all the minute details, then of course I don't any more than you do. Your question demonstrates one of the most confusing aspects of the right wing mind. You have been convinced that anything that doesn't exactly match your parties goals is necessarily evil in every aspect, and there is no possibility that anything good might be involved. Anyone who likes a non-GOP advocated idea must be a bum whose only goal is to destroy America while they lay on the couch and take your money and rights. I couldn't live in such a dark hateful world, and I don't understand how you do.

I hate to break this to you, Bulldog...but if you didn't know that insurance companies can't charge people more for pre-existing conditions then you don't even know the basics of the ACA!

This has nothing to do with political party. It's simple common sense combined with 8th grade math skills. You can't enroll millions of Americans with heavily subsidized health insurance...enroll millions more with pre-existing conditions...and not have healthcare premiums for healthy Middle Class people go up. You can't unless the Federal Government picks up the tab which means massive increases to the deficit. So those are your choices...you either level with Middle Class America that their healthcare premiums are going to have to be really high to pay for the people like yourself...or you level with the country that having the Federal Government cover the tab is going to so expensive it's going to bury us in debt.

If you're not telling people that...you're lying to them.

You questioned my statement that you can be charged extra for pre-existing conditions, so I double checked. I was wrong. Even though I am confident in most of my beliefs, the introduction of new, credible facts can change my mind quickly. It's hard to argue with the truth, and kind of senseless. Thank you for instigating my better understanding of the truth. However, I couldn't find any example of any subsidy or extra payment to compensate the insurance companies for that. My understanding is that the millions of new policies will more than make up for any loss they might have for that reason. Are you saying that the increase in volume for the insurance companies with their corresponding profit gains were somehow kept secret? How exactly am I being subsidized? Of course rates, which have always been set by the insurance companies, will always go up. They always have, and I suspect they always will, but the rate of increase has dropped quite pleasingly.

Bulldog? How can you not know these things?

The Obama Administration worked out a deal with the health insurance companies where if they would support the ACA by not raising rates past a certain level the Federal Government would agree to reimburse them for any loses they suffered if the cost for providing healthcare under the new system was greater than projected. The insurance companies did so because they KNOW that the costs will have to be much greater than projected but they don't care because the Feds will pay them back whatever they lose. It's why rates haven't gone up as they normally would to cover people like yourself with pre-existing conditions. That does NOT mean that the cost of health care has gone down in this country. Americans simply haven't seen their part of the bill come due yet because the true costs are being hidden.

Ok. You have reasons why you don't like healthcare. I just don't see those reasons as that terrible. Bottom line.....That particular cow is already out of the barn and the right's effort to close the barn door over 50 times after the fact is just childish. Nobody ever said it was perfect, or that there might not be changes to make it better, so if you or your elected representatives have any ideas, then bring them on. Whining about it won't help anything. We have healthcare, and your personal opinion of it just doesn't matter. I was hoping for single payer.

Well of COURSE you don't see the reasons why the ACA is terrible, Bulldog...you're one of the ones being helped by it!

What are you going to tell a Middle Class family that doesn't qualify for subsidies and doesn't have a pre-existing condition? For them the ACA is a disaster. Either their healthcare premiums are going to go up drastically or the Federal debt is going to skyrocket which means the tax man will come knocking looking for more...more...more! At the same time the level of care that they receive for the money they pay is going to decrease. So what is it that's good about the ACA for your average Middle Class American, Bulldog?

 

[Dot Com]

surely no Repub voter here would equate Benghazi with the REAL 9-11? That would be a hack move of the lowest order.

 

[JoeB131]

Well of COURSE you don't see the reasons why the ACA is terrible, Bulldog...you're one of the ones being helped by it!

Yes, how dare he think something that helps him isn't terrible!!!!

The ACA doesn't really help me, but I think still think it's a pretty good idea.

What are you going to tell a Middle Class family that doesn't qualify for subsidies and doesn't have a pre-existing condition? For them the ACA is a disaster.

Well, no, it isn't. You see, the reason WHY this is a good idea is because the insurance companies were pretty much calling ANYTHING a pre-existing condition. Acne was a pre-existing condition if you had skin cancer.

Either their healthcare premiums are going to go up drastically or the Federal debt is going to skyrocket which means the tax man will come knocking looking for more...more...more! At the same time the level of care that they receive for the money they pay is going to decrease. So what is it that's good about the ACA for your average Middle Class American, Bulldog?

Well, we could do the sensible thing and go to Single Payer, and pay only 8% of our GDP instead of 18% on health care. But you'd probably scream "Socialism" and piss yourself.

The coverage for pre-exsiting conditions - which is again, making sure that if you paid premiums, some cocksucker insurance company can't claim your illness is something they won't cover - is more than covered by the fact everyone has to get insured now. Massachusetts showed this works just fine, but Mitt Romney didn't want to be caught having a drink with his own idea.

 

[Oldstyle]

Well of COURSE you don't see the reasons why the ACA is terrible, Bulldog...you're one of the ones being helped by it!

Yes, how dare he think something that helps him isn't terrible!!!!

The ACA doesn't really help me, but I think still think it's a pretty good idea.

What are you going to tell a Middle Class family that doesn't qualify for subsidies and doesn't have a pre-existing condition? For them the ACA is a disaster.

Well, no, it isn't. You see, the reason WHY this is a good idea is because the insurance companies were pretty much calling ANYTHING a pre-existing condition. Acne was a pre-existing condition if you had skin cancer.

Either their healthcare premiums are going to go up drastically or the Federal debt is going to skyrocket which means the tax man will come knocking looking for more...more...more! At the same time the level of care that they receive for the money they pay is going to decrease. So what is it that's good about the ACA for your average Middle Class American, Bulldog?

Well, we could do the sensible thing and go to Single Payer, and pay only 8% of our GDP instead of 18% on health care. But you'd probably scream "Socialism" and piss yourself.

The coverage for pre-exsiting conditions - which is again, making sure that if you paid premiums, some cocksucker insurance company can't claim your illness is something they won't cover - is more than covered by the fact everyone has to get insured now. Massachusetts showed this works just fine, but Mitt Romney didn't want to be caught having a drink with his own idea.

Tell me how "single payer" is doing in Vermont, Joey...

 

[Oldstyle]

Single Payer Health System Dies in Vermont The Fiscal Times

 

[JoeB131]

Tell me how "single payer" is doing in Vermont, Joey...

You mean, never tried?

How it is doing in Canada? Japan? England? Germany? Italy?

Oh,wait. It works pretty well in those countries. They spend less, live longer, less of their babies die.

 

[JoeB131]

Single Payer Health System Dies in Vermont The Fiscal Times

I'm sure that makes you happy. Just the thought of poor people getting good health coverage keeps you up at night.

This is why conservativism is doomed. It's ultimately heartless.

 

[Oldstyle]

Tell me how "single payer" is doing in Vermont, Joey...

You mean, never tried?

How it is doing in Canada? Japan? England? Germany? Italy?

Oh,wait. It works pretty well in those countries. They spend less, live longer, less of their babies die.

So tell me why a Democratic Gov in a Blue State like Vermont killed it, Joey?

 

[JoeB131]

So tell me why a Democratic Gov in a Blue State like Vermont killed it, Joey?

YOu mean a small blue state couldn't withstand the political clout of big insurance companies?

So, tell me, without blurting out the words "socialism" or "Freedom", why does single payer horrify you so much?

 

[Oldstyle]

You can bluster about me hating poor people all you want, Joey...but the bottom line will always remain. Someone has to pay for what you want. Who's that going to be and how much do you expect them to pay? Level with people for a change instead of lying to them.

 

[Oldstyle]

No, I mean a liberal Governor in a liberal State couldn't make the numbers work. Single Payer was passed...he simply needed to show how it would be paid for. When the numbers were calculated the tax increases needed were going to be huge and the Governor bailed.

 

[JoeB131]

You can bluster about me hating poor people all you want, Joey...but the bottom line will always remain. Someone has to pay for what you want. Who's that going to be and how much do you expect them to pay? Level with people for a change instead of lying to them.

Yes, someone has to pay for it.

Now, here's the point you always avoid. Most countries with single payer spend about 8 to 11% of their GDP on health care, and they cover everyone. the US spends 18% of its GDP on health care, and until ObamaCare 25% had either inadequate insurance or no insurance.

So it's not a matter of someone paying. People are paying. It's what are they paying for.

If they are paying that money, and it is going to Ed Hanaway's 108 million dollar Severance package from Cigna because he made Cigna more profitable by denying payments to people who had paid for insurance, then that isn't an efficeint use of payments.

So the Single Payer states- No insurance companies, hospitals are required to only charge what a test or procedure costs, and not what they think they can get away with.

A great example. I've talked about how after I ran up some medical bills, they made a concerted effort to get me off the payroll. One of those operations, Cigna was charged $32,000 for after they lost the argument that it was an "elective" surgery. They then changed the policy so that wasn't covered anymore.

Another gal in the same office looked into the same surgery. Same doctor I had, same hospital, same procedure, but it was considered elective so she had to pay for it out of pocket. They offered to do it for her for $17,000.

Fact is, we've offered single payer many times, and Big Insurance rolls out Harry and Louise to lie, and they've been doing that since the 1960's, when they got Ronald Reagan to call Medicare "Socialism".

 

[JoeB131]

No, I mean a liberal Governor in a liberal State couldn't make the numbers work. Single Payer was passed...he simply needed to show how it would be paid for. When the numbers were calculated the tax increases needed were going to be huge and the Governor bailed.

I'm sure that's the story you like to tell yourself.

So one more time, why does single payer horrify you so much? the thought that you might get the same level of care a poor person gets, or the thought a poor person might get the same level of care you do.

 

[Oldstyle]

No, I mean a liberal Governor in a liberal State couldn't make the numbers work. Single Payer was passed...he simply needed to show how it would be paid for. When the numbers were calculated the tax increases needed were going to be huge and the Governor bailed.

I'm sure that's the story you like to tell yourself.

So one more time, why does single payer horrify you so much? the thought that you might get the same level of care a poor person gets, or the thought a poor person might get the same level of care you do.

You can't answer my question...can you, Joey? Why isn't Single Payer working in Vermont? Liberal Governor wants it...deep Blue State voted for it...one of the more affluent States in the Country...yet the Governor couldn't make the numbers work? How can that BE!

 

[NotfooledbyW]

OS 10399560

What are you going to tell a Middle Class family that doesn't qualify for subsidies and doesn't have a pre-existing condition? For them the ACA is a disaster

Does Oldstyle provide any lifetime guarantees that a healthy middle class family will not ever have a family member develop and discover a condition that becomes pre-existing the next year when they go to buy insurance before the ACA protected them.

Oldstyle is arguing that healthy people never get sick.

Both of my daughters have been running marathons the past few years and last winter I decided to train to run one with them. But early last spring I began jogging and the more I ran the weaker I got. It came to a point where I could barely walk up a slight grade.

After a summer of tests and numerous consultations with all kinds of docs I ended up finding out I have a somewhat rare genetic condition called HTC hyper tropic cardiomyopathy.

Fortunately in my case from what I'm told I am several millimeters away from having a high risk heart condition but it was totally unexpected.

I have insurance which is a great relief but I can understand what Oldstyle's healthy middle class family would go through if some health condition unexpectedly hits and a job and insurance are lost and then savings and home equity are eaten up just to go on living.

The ACA protects healthy families too. It insures them against bankruptcy when the unexpected happens,

That Oldstyle can't imagine that tells us something about his contempt for peopie who suffer real setbacks and hardship and screams 'socialism' when something is done that helps.

It actually helps the economy to keep hardworking people out of bankruptcy and going on with life if a health condition sets them back.

 

[JoeB131]

You can't answer my question...can you, Joey? Why isn't Single Payer working in Vermont? Liberal Governor wants it...deep Blue State voted for it...one of the more affluent States in the Country...yet the Governor couldn't make the numbers work? How can that BE!

You mean why couldn't the state control costs, which is the only way you can get Single Payer to work?

It can't be done at the state level, and you know it.

Has to be done at the national level.

But since you keep trying to pretend Japan, England and Canada don't exist. (or that they are horrible socialist dystopias) I'm not sure if you really want to have the conversation.

 

[Dot Com]

So the communications arm of the Repub party/Murdoch TV just stopped talking about Benghazi? They find another manufactured scandal to gin-up yet?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

So the communications arm of the Repub party/Murdoch TV just stopped talking about Benghazi? They find another manufactured scandal to gin-up yet?

WMAL hate talk radio floated the idea this morning that Obama refused to call the cyber attack against SONY a 'terrorist attack' and something about going to bed while the cyber crime was ongoing. But they need a dead American body or two in order for some startup traction.

 

[Oldstyle]

You can't answer my question...can you, Joey? Why isn't Single Payer working in Vermont? Liberal Governor wants it...deep Blue State voted for it...one of the more affluent States in the Country...yet the Governor couldn't make the numbers work? How can that BE!

You mean why couldn't the state control costs, which is the only way you can get Single Payer to work?

It can't be done at the state level, and you know it.

Has to be done at the national level.

But since you keep trying to pretend Japan, England and Canada don't exist. (or that they are horrible socialist dystopias) I'm not sure if you really want to have the conversation.

Explain why it can't be done at the State level, Joey! The only difference between a State and the Nation is that State's can't print money to pay their debts and the Federal Government can.

Vermont's Governor was going to have to be honest with people about how much more in taxes they were going to have to shell out for single payer health care. He didn't have the balls to do it!

You liberals want to do single payer on a national level because the Feds can print the money to pay for it so people won't realize how costly it's going to be.

 

[JoeB131]

Explain why it can't be done at the State level, Joey! The only difference between a State and the Nation is that State's can't print money to pay their debts and the Federal Government can.

The States also can't set prices for out of state healthcare providers, medical manufacturers and corporations. You do kind of get that most hospitals and insurance companies are national entities, right?

Vermont's Governor was going to have to be honest with people about how much more in taxes they were going to have to shell out for single payer health care. He didn't have the balls to do it!

You mean as opposed to letting people know how hard they are working to generate the cash that pays for insurance through their employers? Again, you keep ignoring the fact that we are spending more as a percentage on health care than any other nation on earth. Everyone else has figured this out. Except us. I guess that's why the call it "American Exceptionalism" - We are too stupid to figure out that the rich have us by the shorthairs.

You liberals want to do single payer on a national level because the Feds can print the money to pay for it so people won't realize how costly it's going to be.

NO, we just realize that's the only way you can do it right. If Vermont had gone through with it, Cigna and Pfizer would have pulled every string in the book to sink it.

Keep in mind, the onerous number you are talking about was 2.85 billion for Vermont to have single payer, without being able to get Cardinal Health and Merck to meet set prices like, let's say, Canada does. The Federal government spends that amount on a single Aircraft carrier.