Obamacare causes prices to skyrocket

[P@triot]

Liberalism doing what it does best - inflicting tremendous harm on everything it touches (people, economies, businesses, etc.).

Her Obamacare Plan Could Be $650 a Month.

 

[P@triot]

So much for the false liberal narrative that Obamacare will "reduce" healthcare costs....

Because of Obamacare, young people have seen up to a 44% increase in premiums.

3 Reasons Why Obamacare Is Bad for Millennials

Blog. Thin on facts.

Packed full of facts had you actually taken the time to read and then click on the links in the story which were proof of what was stated. The Heritage Foundation specializes in research - not opinion pieces. When liberals want to deny reality, they need to be more clever than something this weak.

 

[Arianrhod]

So much for the false liberal narrative that Obamacare will "reduce" healthcare costs....

Because of Obamacare, young people have seen up to a 44% increase in premiums.

3 Reasons Why Obamacare Is Bad for Millennials

Blog. Thin on facts.

Packed full of facts had you actually taken the time to read and then click on the links in the story which were proof of what was stated. The Heritage Foundation specializes in research - not opinion pieces. When liberals want to deny reality, they need to be more clever than something this weak.

Then why couldn't you post the facts from the original sources instead of having them premasticated for you by some blogger?

Liberalism doing what it does best - inflicting tremendous harm on everything it touches (people, economies, businesses, etc.).

Her Obamacare Plan Could Be $650 a Month.

"Could" is such a wonderful word - full of possibilities of what might happen but has not yet happened. Get back to us in 2017 and let us know whether Gavin's wife's policy really did increase by that much, will you?

 

[P@triot]

Packed full of facts had you actually taken the time to read and then click on the links in the story which were proof of what was stated. The Heritage Foundation specializes in research - not opinion pieces. When liberals want to deny reality, they need to be more clever than something this weak.

Then why couldn't you post the facts from the original sources instead of having them premasticated for you by some blogger?

Why? Because you're intellectually lazy? The article not only summarizes everything nicely (for people like you) but then it is FULL of links to everything stated for independent verification (giving people who want to dig deeper the option to do so). In addition, my reasons for posting a particular article are really none of your concern. What should be your concern is not challenging something before you read and understand it. Because you come across looking really dumb when you do that.

Liberalism doing what it does best - inflicting tremendous harm on everything it touches (people, economies, businesses, etc.).

Her Obamacare Plan Could Be $650 a Month.

"Could" is such a wonderful word - full of possibilities of what might happen but has not yet happened. Get back to us in 2017 and let us know whether Gavin's wife's policy really did increase by that much, will you?

Once again you did not read the article but commented on it anyway. I would highly recommend reading the article (but I'm sure you won't ).

 

[Arianrhod]

Packed full of facts had you actually taken the time to read and then click on the links in the story which were proof of what was stated. The Heritage Foundation specializes in research - not opinion pieces. When liberals want to deny reality, they need to be more clever than something this weak.

Then why couldn't you post the facts from the original sources instead of having them premasticated for you by some blogger?

Why? Because you're intellectually lazy? The article not only summarizes everything nicely (for people like you) but then it is FULL of links to everything stated for independent verification (giving people who want to dig deeper the option to do so). In addition, my reasons for posting a particular article are really none of your concern. What should be your concern is not challenging something before you read and understand it. Because you come across looking really dumb when you do that.

Liberalism doing what it does best - inflicting tremendous harm on everything it touches (people, economies, businesses, etc.).

Her Obamacare Plan Could Be $650 a Month.

"Could" is such a wonderful word - full of possibilities of what might happen but has not yet happened. Get back to us in 2017 and let us know whether Gavin's wife's policy really did increase by that much, will you?

Once again you did not read the article but commented on it anyway. I would highly recommend reading the article (but I'm sure you won't ).

I just find it amusing how many people here need to have their information spoon-fed to them by bloggers. Does that augment the truthiness? Is the perception that bloggers are incapable of spinning or outright lying, but cold hard facts are innately suspect? Fascinating...

 

[P@triot]

Packed full of facts had you actually taken the time to read and then click on the links in the story which were proof of what was stated. The Heritage Foundation specializes in research - not opinion pieces. When liberals want to deny reality, they need to be more clever than something this weak.

Then why couldn't you post the facts from the original sources instead of having them premasticated for you by some blogger?

Why? Because you're intellectually lazy? The article not only summarizes everything nicely (for people like you) but then it is FULL of links to everything stated for independent verification (giving people who want to dig deeper the option to do so). In addition, my reasons for posting a particular article are really none of your concern. What should be your concern is not challenging something before you read and understand it. Because you come across looking really dumb when you do that.

Liberalism doing what it does best - inflicting tremendous harm on everything it touches (people, economies, businesses, etc.).

Her Obamacare Plan Could Be $650 a Month.

"Could" is such a wonderful word - full of possibilities of what might happen but has not yet happened. Get back to us in 2017 and let us know whether Gavin's wife's policy really did increase by that much, will you?

Once again you did not read the article but commented on it anyway. I would highly recommend reading the article (but I'm sure you won't ).

I just find it amusing how many people here need to have their information spoon-fed to them by bloggers. Does that augment the truthiness? Is the perception that bloggers are incapable of spinning or outright lying, but cold hard facts are innately suspect? Fascinating...

Sorry - but the Heritage Foundation is the single most influential political think tank in America. It is not a "blogger". You're trying to spin it as much because you find the facts very inconvenient to the narrative you would like to spin.

 

[Arianrhod]

Packed full of facts had you actually taken the time to read and then click on the links in the story which were proof of what was stated. The Heritage Foundation specializes in research - not opinion pieces. When liberals want to deny reality, they need to be more clever than something this weak.

Then why couldn't you post the facts from the original sources instead of having them premasticated for you by some blogger?

Why? Because you're intellectually lazy? The article not only summarizes everything nicely (for people like you) but then it is FULL of links to everything stated for independent verification (giving people who want to dig deeper the option to do so). In addition, my reasons for posting a particular article are really none of your concern. What should be your concern is not challenging something before you read and understand it. Because you come across looking really dumb when you do that.

Liberalism doing what it does best - inflicting tremendous harm on everything it touches (people, economies, businesses, etc.).

Her Obamacare Plan Could Be $650 a Month.

"Could" is such a wonderful word - full of possibilities of what might happen but has not yet happened. Get back to us in 2017 and let us know whether Gavin's wife's policy really did increase by that much, will you?

Once again you did not read the article but commented on it anyway. I would highly recommend reading the article (but I'm sure you won't ).

I just find it amusing how many people here need to have their information spoon-fed to them by bloggers. Does that augment the truthiness? Is the perception that bloggers are incapable of spinning or outright lying, but cold hard facts are innately suspect? Fascinating...

Sorry - but the Heritage Foundation is the single most influential political think tank in America. It is not a "blogger". You're trying to spin it as much because you find the facts very inconvenient to the narrative you would like to spin.

The person who wrote the blog is not an employee of the Heritage Foundation, but a blogger. He could be anybody. Are you aware of his credentials?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Packed full of facts had you actually taken the time to read and then click on the links in the story which were proof of what was stated. The Heritage Foundation specializes in research - not opinion pieces. When liberals want to deny reality, they need to be more clever than something this weak.

Then why couldn't you post the facts from the original sources instead of having them premasticated for you by some blogger?

Why? Because you're intellectually lazy? The article not only summarizes everything nicely (for people like you) but then it is FULL of links to everything stated for independent verification (giving people who want to dig deeper the option to do so). In addition, my reasons for posting a particular article are really none of your concern. What should be your concern is not challenging something before you read and understand it. Because you come across looking really dumb when you do that.

Liberalism doing what it does best - inflicting tremendous harm on everything it touches (people, economies, businesses, etc.).

Her Obamacare Plan Could Be $650 a Month.

"Could" is such a wonderful word - full of possibilities of what might happen but has not yet happened. Get back to us in 2017 and let us know whether Gavin's wife's policy really did increase by that much, will you?

Once again you did not read the article but commented on it anyway. I would highly recommend reading the article (but I'm sure you won't ).

I just find it amusing how many people here need to have their information spoon-fed to them by bloggers. Does that augment the truthiness? Is the perception that bloggers are incapable of spinning or outright lying, but cold hard facts are innately suspect? Fascinating...

Sorry - but the Heritage Foundation is the single most influential political think tank in America. It is not a "blogger". You're trying to spin it as much because you find the facts very inconvenient to the narrative you would like to spin.

Funny how Heritage is what gave us Obamacare.......but they are just bloggers.

Well, they didn't give us Obamacare and they are more than bloggers.

However, they do have an agenda and people do need to read their stuff with filters on.

 

[Arianrhod]

Funny how Heritage is what gave us Obamacare.......but they are just bloggers.

No, the blogger is a blogger. He is not a member of the Foundation's staff. What are his credentials?

The filtering is what you guys do when you let a blogger interpret the facts for you.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Liberalism doing what it does best - inflicting tremendous harm on everything it touches (people, economies, businesses, etc.).

Her Obamacare Plan Could Be $650 a Month.

Probably will be.....

And what about the deductible......

But this isn't liberalism....it is the far left

 

[Dekster]

I just got my rate increase letter from my health insurance. I have a grandfathered policy with no subsidy. My rate increase starting in a couple months will be 16%. The last few years it has been closer to 28% a year, so at least they are dialing it in some (or the numbers are getting so big that the percentages seem smaller as the actual dollar amounts rise of the rate increases).

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I just got my rate increase letter from my health insurance. I have a grandfathered policy with no subsidy. My rate increase starting in a couple months will be 16%. The last few years it has been closer to 28% a year, so at least they are dialing it in some (or the numbers are getting so big that the percentages seem smaller as the actual dollar amounts rise of the rate increases).

And I'll bet you are so happy to be paying into this mess.

 

[Dekster]

I just got my rate increase letter from my health insurance. I have a grandfathered policy with no subsidy. My rate increase starting in a couple months will be 16%. The last few years it has been closer to 28% a year, so at least they are dialing it in some (or the numbers are getting so big that the percentages seem smaller as the actual dollar amounts rise of the rate increases).

And I'll bet you are so happy to be paying into this mess.

What am I paying into? My policy is not an exchange policy and I do not get a subsidy. My yearly increase this year in premiums is more in line with what they were before the exchanges started, so at least going forward from Nov 1, 2016 to October 31 2017, I won't be getting soaked like I have been in recent years.

I did not and do not support the ACA. I support the idea of extending insurance to those who cannot get it or truly afford it, or, in the alternative devising another method to insure people have access to reasonable healthcare through clinics, etc. I am open to a lot of things, but repealing the ACA and allowing insurers to compete across state lines won't do a thing to help the uninsured to gain access to healthcare.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I just got my rate increase letter from my health insurance. I have a grandfathered policy with no subsidy. My rate increase starting in a couple months will be 16%. The last few years it has been closer to 28% a year, so at least they are dialing it in some (or the numbers are getting so big that the percentages seem smaller as the actual dollar amounts rise of the rate increases).

And I'll bet you are so happy to be paying into this mess.

What am I paying into? My policy is not an exchange policy and I do not get a subsidy. My yearly increase this year in premiums is more in line with what they were before the exchanges started, so at least going forward from Nov 1, 2016 to October 31 2017, I won't be getting soaked like I have been in recent years.

I did not and do not support the ACA. I support the idea of extending insurance to those who cannot get it or truly afford it, or, in the alternative devising another method to insure people have access to reasonable healthcare through clinics, etc. I am open to a lot of things, but repealing the ACA and allowing insurers to compete across state lines won't do a thing to help the uninsured to gain access to healthcare.

Sorry.....next time, I'll put the words "being sarcastic" next to my post.

 

[P@triot]

The worst legislation in U.S. history. From start to finish. From the illegal and unethical ways it was "passed" to the ignorant design, to the lies used to promote it - there has never been a bigger disaster than Obamacare...

Aetna Has Revealed Obamacare's Many Broken Promises

 

[Arianrhod]

The worst legislation in U.S. history. From start to finish. From the illegal and unethical ways it was "passed" to the ignorant design, to the lies used to promote it - there has never been a bigger disaster than Obamacare...

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

I just got my rate increase letter from my health insurance. I have a grandfathered policy with no subsidy. My rate increase starting in a couple months will be 16%. The last few years it has been closer to 28% a year, so at least they are dialing it in some (or the numbers are getting so big that the percentages seem smaller as the actual dollar amounts rise of the rate increases).

And I'll bet you are so happy to be paying into this mess.

What am I paying into? My policy is not an exchange policy and I do not get a subsidy. My yearly increase this year in premiums is more in line with what they were before the exchanges started, so at least going forward from Nov 1, 2016 to October 31 2017, I won't be getting soaked like I have been in recent years.

I did not and do not support the ACA. I support the idea of extending insurance to those who cannot get it or truly afford it, or, in the alternative devising another method to insure people have access to reasonable healthcare through clinics, etc. I am open to a lot of things, but repealing the ACA and allowing insurers to compete across state lines won't do a thing to help the uninsured to gain access to healthcare.

Medicaid was set up for those who couldn't get a job and employer provided healthcare. Back when Clinton signed into LAW, the contract with America(that New Gingrich) brought to him, many people got off welfare after 2 years of collecting it and had to work or get an education, because the welfare ended on that 2nd year. People didn't starve without the welfare and because of Newt, Bill(I did not have sexual relations with that woman while Hillary watched) Clinton got to claim a very good economy. Many people got employer provided healthcare, costs were down, do to competition and Medicaid for those still unemployed and Medicare for those retired. But then along came Obummer, Nancy Blinkie Pelosi and Dirty Harry Reid, who behind closed doors and against the will of the people, created a fiasco of a Bill(that had to be passed before we could see what was in that Bill) that you could keep your doctor(if the doctor didn't quit) you could keep your hospital(if the hospital didn't close) and you would save $2,500 on healthcare. Boy when Jonathan Gruber called liberal voters stupid, that was a gross understatement. Liberals are moronic for what they have done to the US.

 

[emilynghiem]

The worst legislation in U.S. history. From start to finish. From the illegal and unethical ways it was "passed" to the ignorant design, to the lies used to promote it - there has never been a bigger disaster than Obamacare...

Aetna Has Revealed Obamacare's Many Broken Promises

Dear P@triot
To be fair, I would say the equivalent argument
on the other side is to argue that the cost of
lives and resources on the War in Iraq was
equally if not more disastrous.

Both are argued as unconstitutional if you follow
traditional laws. Both required coloring outside the lines of
the Constitution in order to justify. And both involved
doling out trillions of dollars at taxpayers expense
without guarantee of achieving the goal, but in the
process imposing costs and damages onto people of
both nations. As many conservatives denounced Bush's actions
as unconstitutional as liberals denouncing Obama's; so the dissent
wasn't just partisan opposition, but within the respective parties as well,
criticizing the policies of their own party leaders and officials.

So in comparison of these two contested situations,
it isn't fair to criticize one and not the other.

 

[emilynghiem]

I just got my rate increase letter from my health insurance. I have a grandfathered policy with no subsidy. My rate increase starting in a couple months will be 16%. The last few years it has been closer to 28% a year, so at least they are dialing it in some (or the numbers are getting so big that the percentages seem smaller as the actual dollar amounts rise of the rate increases).

And I'll bet you are so happy to be paying into this mess.

Dear Sun Devil 92
Why not require the people who support this plan to pay for it and provide for whoever they want to be covered under it; make it voluntary to opt into if it's so economical and sustainable.

Let the Green Democrats set up coops and singlepayer health care that those supporters opt into to pay for and provide health care for fellow members of that group.

Let the conservatives Republicans and Christians who believe in free market and prolife health care opt into that system and fund the solutions that group believes is most effective for covering for that population.

And let each group decide its own policies, terms and conditions, etc.

That way
* prochoice people can fund that policy and all its costs and consequences
* prolife people can support health care that doesn't involve abortion or abortifacient birth control
* whatever people believe in funding they can exercise freely without requiring the participation of others in opposition
* and other terms and conditions can also be
organized separately by party so people are grouped
by like beliefs:
- those who are for singlepayer and against the death penalty can redirect funding into preventative care, education and effective social services, and away from capital punishment or other abusive prison practices that waste taxpayer money destroying life and mental health instead of helping people with recovery and rehab

- those who believe in spiritual generational healing, as practiced in Christianity to eradicate the root cause of criminal abuse and addiction, can require this of their members in order to afford health care on a sustainable and cost effective basis.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

The worst legislation in U.S. history. From start to finish. From the illegal and unethical ways it was "passed" to the ignorant design, to the lies used to promote it - there has never been a bigger disaster than Obamacare...

Aetna Has Revealed Obamacare's Many Broken Promises

Dear P@triot
To be fair, I would say the equivalent argument
on the other side is to argue that the cost of
lives and resources on the War in Iraq was
equally if not more disastrous.

Both are argued as unconstitutional if you follow
traditional laws. Both required coloring outside the lines of
the Constitution in order to justify. And both involved
doling out trillions of dollars at taxpayers expense
without guarantee of achieving the goal, but in the
process imposing costs and damages onto people of
both nations. As many conservatives denounced Bush's actions
as unconstitutional as liberals denouncing Obama's; so the dissent
wasn't just partisan opposition, but within the respective parties as well,
criticizing the policies of their own party leaders and officials.

So in comparison of these two contested situations,
it isn't fair to criticize one and not the other.

Back when the US went to war with Iraq, there was a super majority of Senators and Congressmen who voted for the war before a few would of voted against it. That means 60% or more were in agreement. With Obummbercare, the Dems behind closed doors just the nuclear option,(thank you Dirty Harry Reid) where only a simple majority, 51% had to get the Bill passed before you saw what was in the Bill. Once again a liberal has tried to rewrite history, but I wont let that happen as the TRUTH will also expose the lies from the left.