When there is only 15.8 million truly uninsured how can there be ..

[healthmyths]

"32 million more people will have health coverage thanks to ObamaCare by 2016 :?

So where are these 32 million of 46? million uninsured???

253.5 million or 85% of Americans have health insurance
In 2007, the Census Bureau reported that 253.4 million people -- about 85 percent of the total population -- did have health insurance.

So let's assume there ARE supposedly 50 million uninsured.

According to Census Bureau data, of the estimated 46 million "Americans" without health insurance, more than 10 million are non-U.S. citizens.

If 10 million "uninsured" are NOT citizens that
leaves 36 million!


14 million "uninsured" already covered by Existing Government Health Care Plans Not Being Used

A 2003 Blue Cross/Blue Shield Association study concluded that, "More than 14 million uninsured Americans are already eligible for health insurance through Medicaid and State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).

So after subtracting 10 million "non-citizens and 14 million Already covered that leaves...
22 million supposedly truly uninsured"

Some Just Don't Want Insurance
Many young workers, whose employers do offer it, simply do not consider health insurance. According to the Census Bureau,
18.3 million of the uninsured are under age 34.

The Affordability Factor
In 2007 the Census Bureau reported that more than 14 million people without health insurance earned annual incomes of at least $50,000, with 7.2 million of them making over $75,000.

So assuming a minimum of 7.2 million can afford OR are under 34 and don't want insurance and subtracting 7.2 million from 22 million supposedly uninsured that leaves 15.8 million supposedly "uninsured"!

So where are the "32 million supposedly now covered" under Obamacare?

I mean taking the Census that 15% of 312 million or 46 million is correct
and subtracting 10 million not citizens,
14 million already covered but don't know it and
7.2 million that can afford but don't want it.. that leaves
15.8 million!

Where are the 32 million???

Health Insurance US Health Insurance Statistics – How Many Really are Uninsured?

 

[konradv]

Where are the 32 million???[/SIZE]

Health Insurance US Health Insurance Statistics – How Many Really are Uninsured?

I guess they'd be in the sources you DIDN'T cite. Everything's "crystal clear" when you only present one side of an argument. If Obamacare is so bad, why are you quibbling about numbers? Are prople actually seeing they like certain provisions, so have to take a different tack?!?! I think you're busted, man.

 

[Jarhead]

Where are the 32 million???[/SIZE]

Health Insurance US Health Insurance Statistics – How Many Really are Uninsured?

I guess they'd be in the sources you DIDN'T cite. Everything's "crystal clear" when you only present one side of an argument. If Obamacare is so bad, why are you quibbling about numbers? Are prople actually seeing they like certain provisions, so have to take a different tack?!?! I think you're busted, man.

Excuse me...but if you want honesty..then present honesty.

So far the only two part of the healthcare law have gone into affect...and both are the only two assets of the healthcaqre law..

the under 26 year old part of it..
and
The dismissal of pre existing conditions clauses.

Yes, both are great provisions...but when it is all enccted, premiums are going to skyrocket....THEN we will see how many people are for it.

Did you really never question why things dont hapopen for years in that law?

So people will enjoy the positives without experiencing the negatives.

It was a game played by Obama and the democrats.

 

[healthmyths]

Where are the 32 million???[/SIZE]

Health Insurance US Health Insurance Statistics – How Many Really are Uninsured?

I guess they'd be in the sources you DIDN'T cite. Everything's "crystal clear" when you only present one side of an argument. If Obamacare is so bad, why are you quibbling about numbers? Are prople actually seeing they like certain provisions, so have to take a different tack?!?! I think you're busted, man.

Did you click on this link:
Health Insurance US Health Insurance Statistics – How Many Really are Uninsured?

Because all the statistics.. i.e. come from that link..
10 million "uninsured" are not citizens..
14 million are covered by Medicaid/SCHIP but not registered
7.2 million people who can afford DON"T want to buy but will be forced!
that makes 31.2 million that are not citizens,already covered and don't want.. so again where are the 46 million much less the 32 million?
My math shows subtract 31.2 from 46 leaves 15.8..
NOT 32 million.. NOT 46 million!

ARE YOU A F..king idiot??
"If Obamacare is so bad, why are you quibbling about numbers? "

BECAUSE IDIOTS like and those in Congress passed Obamacare BECAUSE they believed there was 46 to 50 million uninsured and that MYTH convinced some people they were "doing good"!!!

Obamacare NEVER addressed the $600 billion a year "defensive Medicine" cost.
Obamacare NEVER addressed something you are totally ignorant of i.e.
hospitals over charge sometimes 6,000% to Medicare and you ignorantly think then the government can manage better ALL healthcare as Obamacare?

YOU are totally ignorant and that's why this Obamanation called Obamacare passed because stupid, ignorant people like YOU NEVER questioned the MSM and their extremely biased stories... YOU naively believed that 46 to 50 million are uninsured .. NEVER questioning the numbers much less the premise that Obamacare would NEVER work and will add $100 billion a year in additional national debt.. minimum!!!
And you dumb..s..t... if you own ANY property watch your property taxes skyrocket and you won't even know why that it was in part to Obamacare!

 

[konradv]

Where are the 32 million???[/SIZE]

Health Insurance US Health Insurance Statistics – How Many Really are Uninsured?

I guess they'd be in the sources you DIDN'T cite. Everything's "crystal clear" when you only present one side of an argument. If Obamacare is so bad, why are you quibbling about numbers? Are prople actually seeing they like certain provisions, so have to take a different tack?!?! I think you're busted, man.

Excuse me...but if you want honesty..then present honesty.

So far the only two part of the healthcare law have gone into affect...and both are the only two assets of the healthcaqre law..

the under 26 year old part of it..
and
The dismissal of pre existing conditions clauses.

Yes, both are great provisions...but when it is all enccted, premiums are going to skyrocket....THEN we will see how many people are for it.

Did you really never question why things dont hapopen for years in that law?

So people will enjoy the positives without experiencing the negatives.

It was a game played by Obama and the democrats.

Then tell your man to quit qibbling over numbers and present the facts. If what you say is true, why not talk about that? The OP makes it sound like opponents are on the defensive now that the truth about the positive points of the plan are known. That would make what has been said previously and what you're saying now, mere scare tactics.

 

[konradv]

Where are the 32 million???[/SIZE]

Health Insurance US Health Insurance Statistics – How Many Really are Uninsured?

I guess they'd be in the sources you DIDN'T cite. Everything's "crystal clear" when you only present one side of an argument. If Obamacare is so bad, why are you quibbling about numbers? Are prople actually seeing they like certain provisions, so have to take a different tack?!?! I think you're busted, man.

Did you click on this link:
Health Insurance US Health Insurance Statistics – How Many Really are Uninsured?

Because all the statistics.. i.e. come from that link..
10 million "uninsured" are not citizens..
14 million are covered by Medicaid/SCHIP but not registered
7.2 million people who can afford DON"T want to buy but will be forced!
that makes 31.2 million that are not citizens,already covered and don't want.. so again where are the 46 million much less the 32 million?
My math shows subtract 31.2 from 46 leaves 15.8..
NOT 32 million.. NOT 46 million!

ARE YOU A F..king idiot??
"If Obamacare is so bad, why are you quibbling about numbers? "

BECAUSE IDIOTS like and those in Congress passed Obamacare BECAUSE they believed there was 46 to 50 million uninsured and that MYTH convinced some people they were "doing good"!!!

Obamacare NEVER addressed the $600 billion a year "defensive Medicine" cost.
Obamacare NEVER addressed something you are totally ignorant of i.e.
hospitals over charge sometimes 6,000% to Medicare and you ignorantly think then the government can manage better ALL healthcare as Obamacare?

YOU are totally ignorant and that's why this Obamanation called Obamacare passed because stupid, ignorant people like YOU NEVER questioned the MSM and their extremely biased stories... YOU naively believed that 46 to 50 million are uninsured .. NEVER questioning the numbers much less the premise that Obamacare would NEVER work and will add $100 billion a year in additional national debt.. minimum!!!
And you dumb..s..t... if you own ANY property watch your property taxes skyrocket and you won't even know why that it was in part to Obamacare!

Then why are the Republicans blocking Medicare reform? How can we trust people who say "Stop Socialism" one minute and "Don't Touch Medicare" the next? I guess that's why they're going to get what they deserve, a flip-flopper like Romney as their candidate.

 

[Jarhead]

I guess they'd be in the sources you DIDN'T cite. Everything's "crystal clear" when you only present one side of an argument. If Obamacare is so bad, why are you quibbling about numbers? Are prople actually seeing they like certain provisions, so have to take a different tack?!?! I think you're busted, man.

Excuse me...but if you want honesty..then present honesty.

So far the only two part of the healthcare law have gone into affect...and both are the only two assets of the healthcaqre law..

the under 26 year old part of it..
and
The dismissal of pre existing conditions clauses.

Yes, both are great provisions...but when it is all enccted, premiums are going to skyrocket....THEN we will see how many people are for it.

Did you really never question why things dont hapopen for years in that law?

So people will enjoy the positives without experiencing the negatives.

It was a game played by Obama and the democrats.

Then tell your man to quit qibbling over numbers and present the facts. If what you say is true, why not talk about that? The OP makes it sound like opponents are on the defensive now that the truth about the positive points of the plan are known. That would make what has been said previously and what you're saying now, mere scare tactics.

But you are assuming that the opposition was not aware of the positives of the plan and denied the positives of the plan.
They were well aware of the positives of the plan and never denied the positives of the plan....they simply believed that the neagatgives will outweigh the positives.

So what did the democratic congress do?

Have the positives kick in years before the negatives.

And when the negatives kick in? It will be too late.

It is known as taking advantage of the naevity of the American People.

 

[RDD_1210]

Which part of your stats highlight people who have insurance but were denied coverage they needed? How about people who had insurance that was woefully inadequate to really insure them against anything?

 

[Jarhead]

I guess they'd be in the sources you DIDN'T cite. Everything's "crystal clear" when you only present one side of an argument. If Obamacare is so bad, why are you quibbling about numbers? Are prople actually seeing they like certain provisions, so have to take a different tack?!?! I think you're busted, man.

Did you click on this link:
Health Insurance US Health Insurance Statistics – How Many Really are Uninsured?

Because all the statistics.. i.e. come from that link..
10 million "uninsured" are not citizens..
14 million are covered by Medicaid/SCHIP but not registered
7.2 million people who can afford DON"T want to buy but will be forced!
that makes 31.2 million that are not citizens,already covered and don't want.. so again where are the 46 million much less the 32 million?
My math shows subtract 31.2 from 46 leaves 15.8..
NOT 32 million.. NOT 46 million!

ARE YOU A F..king idiot??
"If Obamacare is so bad, why are you quibbling about numbers? "

BECAUSE IDIOTS like and those in Congress passed Obamacare BECAUSE they believed there was 46 to 50 million uninsured and that MYTH convinced some people they were "doing good"!!!

Obamacare NEVER addressed the $600 billion a year "defensive Medicine" cost.
Obamacare NEVER addressed something you are totally ignorant of i.e.
hospitals over charge sometimes 6,000% to Medicare and you ignorantly think then the government can manage better ALL healthcare as Obamacare?

YOU are totally ignorant and that's why this Obamanation called Obamacare passed because stupid, ignorant people like YOU NEVER questioned the MSM and their extremely biased stories... YOU naively believed that 46 to 50 million are uninsured .. NEVER questioning the numbers much less the premise that Obamacare would NEVER work and will add $100 billion a year in additional national debt.. minimum!!!
And you dumb..s..t... if you own ANY property watch your property taxes skyrocket and you won't even know why that it was in part to Obamacare!

Then why are the Republicans blocking Medicare reform? How can we trust people who say "Stop Socialism" one minute and "Don't Touch Medicare" the next? I guess that's why they're going to get what they deserve, a flip-flopper like Romney as their candidate.

why are you not aware of the GOP stance?
I dont get it. I am well aware of the democratic party stance....

The GOP is well aware that Medicare has become a way of life for the American People...and once that happens, it is very difficult to change it.

That is why they want to kill the healthcare plan before it becomes a way of life for America...for when the costs skyrocket, it may be too late to ween the American People off of it....such as happened with Medicare.

 

[healthmyths]

Which part of your stats highlight people who have insurance but were denied coverage they needed? How about people who had insurance that was woefully inadequate to really insure them against anything?

YOU ARE RIGHT!! There were people denied coverage!

NOW the FACTS..

"The Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan"
https://www.pcip.gov/

IF there was such a huge problem.. then why are only 41,427 people enrolled when the projections were according to The Medicare program chief actuary predicted last spring that 375,000 would sign up for the new risk pool insurance in 2010!
State by State Enrollment in the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan, as of October 31, 2011 | HealthCare.gov

The projections were 89% OFF!
WHY if it was such a "dire" pressing problem that Out of 310 million Americans, only 41,427 people have the problem given as the principal reason for spending almost $1 trillion, creating more than 150 regulatory agencies and causing perhaps 150 million or more people to change the coverage they now have.

http://healthblog.ncpa.org/health-problem-quantified/

 

[konradv]

Excuse me...but if you want honesty..then present honesty.

So far the only two part of the healthcare law have gone into affect...and both are the only two assets of the healthcaqre law..

the under 26 year old part of it..
and
The dismissal of pre existing conditions clauses.

Yes, both are great provisions...but when it is all enccted, premiums are going to skyrocket....THEN we will see how many people are for it.

Did you really never question why things dont hapopen for years in that law?

So people will enjoy the positives without experiencing the negatives.

It was a game played by Obama and the democrats.

Then tell your man to quit qibbling over numbers and present the facts. If what you say is true, why not talk about that? The OP makes it sound like opponents are on the defensive now that the truth about the positive points of the plan are known. That would make what has been said previously and what you're saying now, mere scare tactics.

But you are assuming that the opposition was not aware of the positives of the plan and denied the positives of the plan.
They were well aware of the positives of the plan and never denied the positives of the plan....they simply believed that the neagatgives will outweigh the positives.

So what did the democratic congress do?

Have the positives kick in years before the negatives.

And when the negatives kick in? It will be too late.

It is known as taking advantage of the naevity of the American People.

Must be nice to live in a world where all positives is a possibility!

 

[konradv]

Which part of your stats highlight people who have insurance but were denied coverage they needed? How about people who had insurance that was woefully inadequate to really insure them against anything?

YOU ARE RIGHT!! There were people denied coverage!

NOW the FACTS..

"The Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan"
https://www.pcip.gov/

IF there was such a huge problem.. then why are only 41,427 people enrolled when the projections were according to The Medicare program chief actuary predicted last spring that 375,000 would sign up for the new risk pool insurance in 2010!
State by State Enrollment in the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan, as of October 31, 2011 | HealthCare.gov

The projections were 89% OFF!
WHY if it was such a "dire" pressing problem that Out of 310 million Americans, only 41,427 people have the problem given as the principal reason for spending almost $1 trillion, creating more than 150 regulatory agencies and causing perhaps 150 million or more people to change the coverage they now have.

http://healthblog.ncpa.org/health-problem-quantified/

What are you whining about now?!?! That figure shows your cost projections are bogus and they're actually much lower. Are we supposed to be angry over that? Seems to me we should be happy and that you're off the deep end on this one.

 

[healthmyths]

Which part of your stats highlight people who have insurance but were denied coverage they needed? How about people who had insurance that was woefully inadequate to really insure them against anything?

YOU ARE RIGHT!! There were people denied coverage!

NOW the FACTS..

"The Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan"
https://www.pcip.gov/

IF there was such a huge problem.. then why are only 41,427 people enrolled when the projections were according to The Medicare program chief actuary predicted last spring that 375,000 would sign up for the new risk pool insurance in 2010!
State by State Enrollment in the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan, as of October 31, 2011 | HealthCare.gov

The projections were 89% OFF!
WHY if it was such a "dire" pressing problem that Out of 310 million Americans, only 41,427 people have the problem given as the principal reason for spending almost $1 trillion, creating more than 150 regulatory agencies and causing perhaps 150 million or more people to change the coverage they now have.

http://healthblog.ncpa.org/health-problem-quantified/

What are you whining about now?!?! That figure shows your cost projections are bogus and they're actually much lower. Are we supposed to be angry over that? Seems to me we should be happy and that you're off the deep end on this one.

THE PREMISE of Obamacare was there were 50 million people not insured!
LIE less the 16 million!
The PREMISE was millions were "denied coverage".. estimates 375,000 would sign up.
LIE ! Off by almost 90%

YET the gross disruptions the FACTS insurance premiums have increased 50% because of "NO PRE-EXISTNG conditions" due to Obamacare!

SO why was there a need to destroy 1/6th of the American economy?
The DEEP end is
a) believing there was 50 million uninsured!
b) That millions were denied coverage and couldn't get LIE!
c) Insurance companies evil greedy profiteering ..

THAT's going off the "deep end"!!!

 

[healthmyths]

Which part of your stats highlight people who have insurance but were denied coverage they needed? How about people who had insurance that was woefully inadequate to really insure them against anything?

YOU ARE RIGHT!! There were people denied coverage!

NOW the FACTS..

"The Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan"
https://www.pcip.gov/

IF there was such a huge problem.. then why are only 41,427 people enrolled when the projections were according to The Medicare program chief actuary predicted last spring that 375,000 would sign up for the new risk pool insurance in 2010!
State by State Enrollment in the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan, as of October 31, 2011 | HealthCare.gov

The projections were 89% OFF!
WHY if it was such a "dire" pressing problem that Out of 310 million Americans, only 41,427 people have the problem given as the principal reason for spending almost $1 trillion, creating more than 150 regulatory agencies and causing perhaps 150 million or more people to change the coverage they now have.

http://healthblog.ncpa.org/health-problem-quantified/

What are you whining about now?!?! That figure shows your cost projections are bogus and they're actually much lower. Are we supposed to be angry over that? Seems to me we should be happy and that you're off the deep end on this one.

If the US SPACE program was OFF by 90% in the first trip to the moon??
NOW that would be a deep END!

How much credibility is there in a government program that MISSED their projections by 90%????

Maybe instead of $1 trillion cost for Obamacare.. it will be $10 TRILLION??

 

[konradv]

YOU ARE RIGHT!! There were people denied coverage!

NOW the FACTS..

"The Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan"
https://www.pcip.gov/

IF there was such a huge problem.. then why are only 41,427 people enrolled when the projections were according to The Medicare program chief actuary predicted last spring that 375,000 would sign up for the new risk pool insurance in 2010!
State by State Enrollment in the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan, as of October 31, 2011 | HealthCare.gov

The projections were 89% OFF!
WHY if it was such a "dire" pressing problem that Out of 310 million Americans, only 41,427 people have the problem given as the principal reason for spending almost $1 trillion, creating more than 150 regulatory agencies and causing perhaps 150 million or more people to change the coverage they now have.

http://healthblog.ncpa.org/health-problem-quantified/

What are you whining about now?!?! That figure shows your cost projections are bogus and they're actually much lower. Are we supposed to be angry over that? Seems to me we should be happy and that you're off the deep end on this one.

THE PREMISE of Obamacare was there were 50 million people not insured!
LIE less the 16 million!
The PREMISE was millions were "denied coverage".. estimates 375,000 would sign up.
LIE ! Off by almost 90%

YET the gross disruptions the FACTS insurance premiums have increased 50% because of "NO PRE-EXISTNG conditions" due to Obamacare!

SO why was there a need to destroy 1/6th of the American economy?
The DEEP end is
a) believing there was 50 million uninsured!
b) That millions were denied coverage and couldn't get LIE!
c) Insurance companies evil greedy profiteering ..

THAT's going off the "deep end"!!!

I'm going off the deep end?!?! You're claiming there are fewer uninsured than estimated AND that it'll end up costing us more. You're going to have to show me your math, because that sure sounds like we'll be paying less!!!

 

[healthmyths]

What are you whining about now?!?! That figure shows your cost projections are bogus and they're actually much lower. Are we supposed to be angry over that? Seems to me we should be happy and that you're off the deep end on this one.

THE PREMISE of Obamacare was there were 50 million people not insured!
LIE less the 16 million!
The PREMISE was millions were "denied coverage".. estimates 375,000 would sign up.
LIE ! Off by almost 90%

YET the gross disruptions the FACTS insurance premiums have increased 50% because of "NO PRE-EXISTNG conditions" due to Obamacare!

SO why was there a need to destroy 1/6th of the American economy?
The DEEP end is
a) believing there was 50 million uninsured!
b) That millions were denied coverage and couldn't get LIE!
c) Insurance companies evil greedy profiteering ..

THAT's going off the "deep end"!!!

I'm going off the deep end?!?! You're claiming there are fewer uninsured than estimated AND that it'll end up costing us more. You're going to have to show me your math, because that sure sounds like we'll be paying less!!!

OK I know big numbers are hard for you to follow!
BUT The major reason for Obamacare passage was the "50 million" uninsured used OVER AND OVER AGAIN!
BIG Problem it appeared..
BUT NO ONE seemed to comprehend what MADE UP those 50 million!
10 million were not citizens.
14 million were covered or needed ONLY to register.
7.2 didn't WANT coverage and CHOSE not to be insured!

So the PROBLEM wasn't as big to justify though the forcing of changes for 150 million people who are NOW seeing the following:

According to Kaiser’s and HRET’s analysis of employer-based health plans, ObamaCare could be responsible for as much as 50 percent of the premium hike.

This means EVERYONE with employer paid insurance are either paying more or have higher co-pays!

That was just ONE affect of Obamacare!

YET NOTHING was done about the $600 billion in defensive medicine costs!
NOTHING done about Medicare paying sometimes 6,000% in markups for hospital claims!

And Donald Berwick former head of Medicare says there is over $250 billion in waste and fraud in Medicare.. AND YET nothing was done to lower that but instead OBAMACARE was EXPANDING just what we needed MORE gross inefficiencies! AND PlEASE don't say Medicare has very little adminstrative costs! I started a business that helps providers 10,000 times a day get Paid by Medicare and I KNOW about their inefficiencies!

 

[waltky]

It's all or nothing...

27 Congressmen to Court: If Individual Mandate's Unconstitutional, Strike Down All Obamacare
January 9, 2012 – Twenty-seven members of Congress, including House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), have signed an amicus brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down the entire Obamacare law if it finds that the individual mandate provision is unconstitutional.

The Family Research Council filed the amicus curiae in the case challenging the constitutionality of the individual mandate of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare. The individual mandate is one provision in a larger law that also requires certain employers to provide government-approved insurance or face a penalty, establishes exchanges for government-approved insurance plans and requires insurers to cover pre-existing conditions. Key to the high court’s decision will be whether striking down this provision would nullify the entire law. The legislation did not contain a severability clause. Severability would allow some parts of the law to be struck down while maintaining others.

Opponents argue that that the provisiom requiring individuals to buy health insurance is not constitutional, while the Obama administration contends that the Commerce Clause of the Constitution allows it. Several lawsuits have been brought against the law, with some lower federal courts striking down the law and others affirming it. Other members of Congress to join the brief are House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution Chairman Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), Republican Study Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), a candidate for governor of Indiana and senior House Judiciary members Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) and Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa).

Ken Klukowski, legal counsel for the Family Research Council, and Nelson Lund, a professor at George Mason University School of Law, co-authored the brief. The FRC’s earlier brief was cited in Florida U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson’s decision to strike down the entire Obamacare law as unconstitutional.

“After almost two years of impassioned debate, Obamacare will finally have its day before the Supreme Court,” Klukowski said in a statement. “The 'individual mandate' in Obamacare that requires all Americans to have health insurance is unconstitutional. And for the reasons we explain in this brief, 135 years of Supreme Court precedent show that this is one of those rare instances where striking down the individual-mandate provision requires the Court to strike down this entire 2,700-page law. “We have high hopes that the Supreme Court will recognize that the individual mandate is unconstitutional, and will act to safeguard the freedoms of all Americans by holding the individual mandate 'nonseverable,' and strike down every part of Obamacare,” Klukowski continued.

Source

 

[g5000]

The "47 million uninsured Americans" has been established as a Big Lie told often. A significant number of those were indeed immigrants. And a few million more were people who voluntarily chose not to buy health insurance.

You can't get people to do something they don't want to do unless you panic them with a Big Lie.

That's how we got this brand new entitlement program.

I would not say the voluntarily uninsured or underinsured figure is as low as 15 million. When I looked into the figures in 2008, I came up with 25 million. However, a substantial chunk of those were people who had been laid off and lost their healthcare benefits that had been provided by their employer.

So the 25 million Americans who are uninsured today are not the same 25 million Americans who will be uinsured tomorrow.

The bottom line is that the solution that Obama came up with was a solution for a problem which does not exist. We need solutions for real world problems, not imaginary ones.

The solution to these imaginary problems are going to bankrupt the states. That's why Obama was very careful to say Obamacare would not cost one federal dime. And even that is a questionable claim.

Beware of the following panic illogic:

1. We must do something.
2. This is something.
3. We must do this.

You will see this kind of illogic based on false premises over and and over and over throughout your lifetime, if you pay attention.

 

[waltky]

Not gonna save the economy...

CBO: ObamaCare-Like Programs Don’t Save Money or Reduce Costs
January 20, 2012 – Health care reform programs that are similar to those promoted by the ObamaCare law do not save the government money or reduce health care costs, according to a new report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

The report examined 10 major demonstration projects conducted by Medicare in which managed care programs and value-based payment programs are evaluated. The two types of health care reforms are key features of ObamaCare – the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which became law in March 2010. In the managed-care programs – where care-management companies were hired to coordinate care between doctors and patients with chronic diseases like diabetes, sending nurses to monitor whether patients were following doctor’s orders – the CBO found that the programs did not reduce costs enough to save the government money. “The evaluations show that most programs have not reduced Medicare spending: In nearly every program involving disease management and care coordination, spending was either unchanged or increased relative to the spending that would have occurred in the absence of the program,” the report said.

In the case of value-based payment programs – where hospitals are paid based on whether they achieve better outcomes for their patients – the CBO again found that all but one of the programs assessed did not reduce health care costs enough to save Medicare any money. “The bundled-payment demonstration achieved savings for the Medicare program, but the demonstrations that paid bonuses to providers on the basis of their quality scores, estimated savings, or both, produced little or no savings,” reported the CBO. Bundled payments refer to when Medicare pays a hospital a single lump sum for one type of service – in this case, heart surgery – instead of paying for each surgery individually, as it normally does.

The CBO noted, however, that this single demonstration project only saved money because Medicare was able to negotiate a bundled payment that was lower than the total cost of making individual payments to doctors – not because the hospitals were more efficient. “The Heart Bypass demonstration yielded savings because Medicare was able to negotiate bundled-payment rates with the seven hospitals and the relevant physicians on their medical staffs that were lower than the separate payments that they otherwise would have received,” it reported. Both managed-care and value-based payment reforms are key parts of ObamaCare. The CBO noted that the law empowers the government to conduct more demonstration projects and to take them national immediately if officials believe they could save significant amounts of money – in effect, changing Medicare without congressional approval or action.

MORE

See also:

Sebelius Upholds Obamacare Rule that Religious Institutions Must Cover Birth Control
January 20, 2012 -- The Obama administration on Friday refused to change an Obamacare rule that will require religious universities and hospitals to pay for birth control or contraceptive drugs — including those that could cause an abortion -- for their women employees.

“This decision was made after very careful consideration, including the important concerns some have raised about religious liberty,” Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said. Under the rule, set forth by the Affordable Care Act, most women employed in the U.S. will have the cost of their birth control covered with no co-pay. However, the administration did delay the effective date of the rule by one year. “This proposal strikes the appropriate balance between respecting religious freedom and increasing access to important preventive services,” Sebelius said in a statement.

The rule is currently the subject of two lawsuits -- one filed on behalf of Belmont Abbey College in North Carolina, and the other filed last month on behalf of Colorado Christian University in suburban Denver. Both suits claim the regulation violates their right not to go against their own conscience. “This is a shameless attempt to kick the can down the road in an election year,” says Hannah Smith, senior legal counsel for The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which is representing both colleges. “Religious colleges, universities, and hospitals will never pay for abortion drugs in violation of their religious beliefs -- this year or any other year.”

The announcement comes just one week after the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision involving the right of churches to select their religious leaders. In EEOC v. Hosanna-Tabor, the Court unanimously rejected the Obama administration’s position that the government had the right to to decide whom churches could employ as a minister. “The administration has seen the writing on the wall,” Smith said. “They know that this mandate cannot survive constitutional scrutiny any more than their ‘extreme’ position in Hosanna-Tabor did. So the administration is trying to delay the inevitable judgment day.” Churches and other places of worship are exempt from having to cover contraception for their employees, if they morally object to the practice.

Source

 

[rdean]

"Only"?