Republicans "fix" Obamacare

[kiwiman127]

I'm sure you didn't even bother to read the link I posted that had the links did you?
God I can't stand lazy people.
ACA state exchanges
Survey of Non-Group Health Insurance Enrollees The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation
You have had two graphs supplied to you by reputable resources and you are still in denial and now you have two links. I'll put money on it that you will still be sucking in opinionated talking points and stand by them over the real world.

Nothing in any of your links supports any assertion about health care costs going down, or Obamacare in any way accomplishing anything to eliminate the rising costs of health care.

Oh, another link I forgot.
EHBS 2014 8211 Section One Cost of Health Insurance 8211 8625 The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation
Now compare the numbers to the chart posted earlier.
Secondly, I never said the rates went down, I said they hadn't grown as quickly, actually I haven't seen anyone make the claim that "health care costs going down, or Obamacare in any way accomplishing anything to eliminate the rising costs of health care."
I want to remind you that I am no fan of Obamacare because of the mandate, which I have been saying since the get-go. I just get sick of the exaggerations and the desire to stay with the status quo, that plays right into the most expensive healthcare system in the world's hands.
A huge majority of economists say the the US can't sustained the cost growth of healthcare. But let's keep the status quo anyway, right?

So let me get this straight.....you refuted a post but did not actually refute it. Apparently you can't be bothered to actually know what is being said in the first place, and just argue "against" whatever you want other people to be saying. Congratulations dumb fuck.

No, my last link is from the article I posted that was the source of my previous two links, I just forgot to attach it to my post. But then, your reactions clearly show you never really read the articles or took the time to look at the highlighted links within the article. If you had, you wouldn't be acting so sophomoric. I can understand your frustration, but I know when I am proved wrong, I accept it and don't call people "dumb fuck" or any other names in retaliation.
So long SwimExpert, it was pleasant for awhile.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Washington tinkers with Obamacare amid mixed results for health law - CBS News


So, Republicans want to help workers by changing the full time threshold from 30 hours to 40 hours. So now, if an employer doesn't want to pay for health insurance he just has to cut them from 40 to 39 hours a week

Why don't Republicans just come out and admit they don't want anyone to have healthcare?




.

Interesting what they will call a fix. Oh well, the Fix Is In

 

[Stephanie]

SNIP:
Healthcare costs still rising (but “not soaring”) under Obamacare
posted at 7:21 pm on January 8, 2015 by Jazz Shaw

• 36 SHARES

If you had a nagging feeling that you were still paying more and more for healthcare coverage while getting fewer covered services, you probably weren’t imagining it, at least according to a new study from the Commonwealth Fund. But before digging into the details, I would take a moment to note how this phenomena is described by Noam Levey of the LA Times.

Although the Affordable Care Act has not led to soaring insurance costs, as many critics claimed it would, the law hasn’t provided much relief to American workers either, according to a new study of employer-provided health benefits.
Workers continue to be squeezed by rising insurance costs, eroding benefits and stagnant wages, the report from the nonprofit Commonwealth Fund found.


Why would you waste our time in such a blatant and ineffective attempt to discredit critics of Obamacare and shore up the reputation of the program when you’re about to show that it has failed in one of its principal selling points?

So the “critics” were clearly wrong because the costs of insurance are not soaring. But in the very next sentence we are informed that these insurance costs are rising to the point where workers are being squeezed, their benefits are eroding and their wages are stagnant.


Well, I know I certainly feel better now. For a moment there I was afraid that the costs might be soaring, but there’s clearly nothing to worry about.

ALL of it here:
Healthcare costs still rising but 8220 not soaring 8221 under Obamacare Hot Air

 

[rightwinger]

snip:
The GOP’s Mandate Strategy
Don’t raise the cutoff to 40 hours.
By The Editors

• 
  
  

Comments
65
Republican leadership has an odd idea for one of its first big policy pushes of this Congress: a change to Obamacare that threatens to make the law worse.

The idea, expected to come to a vote in the House on Thursday, is to change Obamacare’s requirement that most employers provide full-time workers with generous health insurance, a rule known as the “employer mandate.” (Or the “employer shared responsibility provisions,” if you prefer Gruber-speak). It sets the definition of full-time work at 30 hours a week.

Republicans have been making the case for some time — and no small number of Democrats and liberals are sympathetic — that employers will reduce workers’ hours to avoid paying the substantial penalty or providing costly insurance, and that this outweighs the benefits of some workers’ getting insurance thanks to the rule.

The current GOP plan, in the main, is to raise the threshold for full-time work to 40 hours. That may be a more reasonable definition, but there are more Americans who work 40 hours a week or a bit more than there are who work just over 30 hours. The proposal risks, theoretically, cuts to the working hours of many more workers. Research by the Obamacare-friendly Commonwealth Fund seems to support this argument; the CBO did not look at the question closely but predicts little total shift in hours either way.

Republicans also propose to change how the law calculates the number of employees a business has, exempting more small businesses from the mandate. While this can only have a salutary effect for workers and wages, there’s little reason not to go much further and repeal the entire mandate.
Repealing a substantial tax on full-time work will increase the supply of labor and the demand for it — both, as it happens, indicators on which the American economy continues to struggle.

all of it here:
The GOP s Mandate Strategy National Review Online

Stop the presses!

Steph actually cuts and pastes an article supporting Obamacare and bitchslapping Republicans

 

[hadit]

In the Republican version of Obamacare, any company that cuts their full time employees one hour a week doesn't have to pay healthcare

Quite a loophole

Under obamanationcare, those full time employees (which did not have employer provided health insurance to start with) would face sharp reductions in the amount of hours they could work and thus what they would get paid. Do understand this?

Before obamanationcare:

No employer paid health insurance, 40 hours/week work.

After obamanationcare:

No employer paid health insurance, 29 hours/week work.

After first fix to obamanationcare:

No employer paid health insurance, 39 hours/week work.

I don't know about you, but as a worker I would prefer doing away with obamanationcare, but if I can't have that, I'll take the fix.

Cutting employees 11 hours a week places a burden on the employer. He must now hire 25% more workers and juggle his time schedule to provide full coverage of the workweek. What has been shown so far is that most employers have not done this

By allowing employers to just cut 40 hr/week employees by just an hour, Republicans are providing a loophole where nobody has to provide health insurance

And lay off workers or force them under 30 hours/week. You can't just slam employers with a massive increase in the cost of employment and expect nothing to happen.

If that were the case, you would expect the number of part time employees to have skyrocketed in the last two years

In fact, that number has gone down

Being a little deceptive there? The employer mandate didn't kick in until 8 days ago.

 

[rightwinger]

In the Republican version of Obamacare, any company that cuts their full time employees one hour a week doesn't have to pay healthcare

Quite a loophole

Under obamanationcare, those full time employees (which did not have employer provided health insurance to start with) would face sharp reductions in the amount of hours they could work and thus what they would get paid. Do understand this?

Before obamanationcare:

No employer paid health insurance, 40 hours/week work.

After obamanationcare:

No employer paid health insurance, 29 hours/week work.

After first fix to obamanationcare:

No employer paid health insurance, 39 hours/week work.

I don't know about you, but as a worker I would prefer doing away with obamanationcare, but if I can't have that, I'll take the fix.

Cutting employees 11 hours a week places a burden on the employer. He must now hire 25% more workers and juggle his time schedule to provide full coverage of the workweek. What has been shown so far is that most employers have not done this

By allowing employers to just cut 40 hr/week employees by just an hour, Republicans are providing a loophole where nobody has to provide health insurance

And lay off workers or force them under 30 hours/week. You can't just slam employers with a massive increase in the cost of employment and expect nothing to happen.

If that were the case, you would expect the number of part time employees to have skyrocketed in the last two years

In fact, that number has gone down

Being a little deceptive there? The employer mandate didn't kick in until 8 days ago.

Ya think employers would have prepared for it by reducing their workforce down to 30 hrs/week?

They didn't

 

[hadit]

Under obamanationcare, those full time employees (which did not have employer provided health insurance to start with) would face sharp reductions in the amount of hours they could work and thus what they would get paid. Do understand this?

Before obamanationcare:

No employer paid health insurance, 40 hours/week work.

After obamanationcare:

No employer paid health insurance, 29 hours/week work.

After first fix to obamanationcare:

No employer paid health insurance, 39 hours/week work.

I don't know about you, but as a worker I would prefer doing away with obamanationcare, but if I can't have that, I'll take the fix.

Cutting employees 11 hours a week places a burden on the employer. He must now hire 25% more workers and juggle his time schedule to provide full coverage of the workweek. What has been shown so far is that most employers have not done this

By allowing employers to just cut 40 hr/week employees by just an hour, Republicans are providing a loophole where nobody has to provide health insurance

And lay off workers or force them under 30 hours/week. You can't just slam employers with a massive increase in the cost of employment and expect nothing to happen.

If that were the case, you would expect the number of part time employees to have skyrocketed in the last two years

In fact, that number has gone down

Being a little deceptive there? The employer mandate didn't kick in until 8 days ago.

Ya think employers would have prepared for it by reducing their workforce down to 30 hrs/week?

They didn't

Why actually reduce the workforce before you have to? I expect that to happen this year, and plans to already be in place to do it.

 

[SwimExpert]

No, my last link is from the article I posted that was the source of my previous two links, I just forgot to attach it to my post.

So what? You're not refuting anything. You, apparently, could not be bothered to actually know what you were responding to. And even if you had, the sources you have provided still don't even refute what you think you were responding to.

Have health care costs been going up for a long time? Yep.
Has Obamacare provided any solution to that problem? Not even close.

 

[SwimExpert]

Stop the presses!

Steph actually cuts and pastes an article supporting Obamacare and bitchslapping Republicans

Pointing out that Obamacare is failing is supporting Obamacare? Wow, there's no cure for that kind of stupid. Not even with Obamacare.

 

[rightwinger]

Stop the presses!

Steph actually cuts and pastes an article supporting Obamacare and bitchslapping Republicans

Pointing out that Obamacare is failing is supporting Obamacare? Wow, there's no cure for that kind of stupid. Not even with Obamacare.

Obamacare and failing are two words that Conservatives are mandated to speak together

The article does point out that the Republican plan only makes things worse does it not?

 

[SwimExpert]

Stop the presses!

Steph actually cuts and pastes an article supporting Obamacare and bitchslapping Republicans

Pointing out that Obamacare is failing is supporting Obamacare? Wow, there's no cure for that kind of stupid. Not even with Obamacare.

Obamacare and failing are two words that Conservatives are mandated to speak together

The article does point out that the Republican plan only makes things worse does it not?

No, it does not.

 

[dblack]

Washington tinkers with Obamacare amid mixed results for health law - CBS News


So, Republicans want to help workers by changing the full time threshold from 30 hours to 40 hours. So now, if an employer doesn't want to pay for health insurance he just has to cut them from 40 to 39 hours a week

Why don't Republicans just come out and admit they don't want anyone to have healthcare?




.

Awesome! See -- this is how it works. It's the whole good-cop/bad-cop routine. And we're the hapless suspect, getting railroaded into subservience to our corporate master. Go team!

 

[Conservative65]

I don't

Washington tinkers with Obamacare amid mixed results for health law - CBS News


So, Republicans want to help workers by changing the full time threshold from 30 hours to 40 hours. So now, if an employer doesn't want to pay for health insurance he just has to cut them from 40 to 39 hours a week

Why don't Republicans just come out and admit they don't want anyone to have healthcare?




.

Why don't you admit that Obamacare isn't about healthcare but about control?

I don't have a problem with anyone having healthcare. My problem is being expected to fund it for someone else through a mandate. Don't confuse the two as they are different despite the left's inability to distinguish it.

 

[Conservative65]

Then why have they spent the last 25 years trying to stop it?

Really? And what have they been doing to that end? Are they trying to outlaw hospitals? Are they trying to close down medical schools?

You are confusing Obamacare with health insurance, and health insurance with health care.

What he's doing it confusing a desire to not be forced to fund anything and everything, including healthcare, that another person wants with not wanting them to have it. I don't care what and how much of it someone else has as long as their desires don't involve someone else being forced to buy it for them.

 

[Conservative65]

You can't fix something that's broken as Obamacare. It would be like trying to take chicken shit, fix it up, and call it chicken salad.

 

[HenryBHough]

And here I thot the thread was about somebody neutering Obamacare....that kind of "fix".