The real winners of the ACA

[Neotrotsky]

Too bad for you
my linked story is from the Bay area
Obamacare's winners and losers in Bay Area






Obama also made this promise:


“I will sign a universal health-care bill into law by the end of my first term as president that will cover every American and cut the cost of a typical family’s premium by up to $2,500 a year.”

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tvBxCeGtf4]You Lied To Me - YouTube[/ame]

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Pretty sure this couple will not be there...

Obamacare's winners and losers in Bay Area

Part of the losers are Cindy Vinson and Tom Waschura, both Obama supporters:

Vinson, of San Jose, will pay $1,800 more a year for an individual policy, while Waschura, of Portola Valley, will cough up almost $10,000 more for insurance for his family of four.​

Vinson told the newspaper.

“Of course, I want people to have health care,”
“I just didn’t realize I would be the one who was going to pay for it personally.”​

Waschura was similarly surprised.

“I was laughing at Boehner,” he said, “until the mail came today.”​

Fox's Obamacare Victims Aren't Victims At All | Blog | Media Matters for America

A recent Obamacare special on Fox News' Hannity illuminated the network's political bias, pattern of misinformation, and questionable use of anecdotal evidence, brought to light when a former adviser to Montana's governor fact-checked the special and found that not one of the show's guests--who lamented the horrors of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on air--had directly suffered from the law or even visited the insurance exchange. Hannity's reliance on guests who condemned Obamacare due to existing political bias demonstrates Fox News' habit of misinforming on the ACA and raises serious questions about the credibility of other guests that have recounted the "consequences" of the law.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

To draw broad global conclusions from anecdotal accounts is highly illogical.

 

[Neotrotsky]

So is using biased reports from leftist rags
but it does not seem to stop you

Cindy Vinson and Tom Waschura- still stand

So was Papa Obama lying then or is he lying now?

Really, how can anyone now believe what he says when it comes to healthcare

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

So is using biased reports from leftist rags

but it does not seem to stop you

So was Papa Obama lying then or is he lying now?

Really, how can anyone now believe what he says when it comes to healthcare

I am wondering what the rationale would be for a media figure like Hannity to present such easily debunked anecdotal evidence. You think Hannity might be a false flag Obama operation to discredit your side of the issue ?....

All I am saying is give health care for Americans a chance....

 

[Neotrotsky]

Discredit

Papa Obama did that himself

with this false promise:


“I will sign a universal health-care bill into law by the end of my first term as president that will cover every American and cut the cost of a typical family’s premium by up to $2,500 a year.”

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Washington (CNN) -- Just more than half the public says that it's bad for the country that the GOP controls the House of Representatives, according to a new national poll conducted after the end of the partial government shutdown.

And the CNN/ORC International survey also indicates that more than six in 10 Americans say that Speaker of the House John Boehner should be replaced.

The poll was conducted Friday through Sunday, just after the end of the 16-day partial federal government shutdown that was caused in part by a push by House conservatives to try and dismantle the health care law, which is President Barack Obama's signature domestic achievement.

According to the survey, 54% say it's a bad thing that the GOP controls the House, up 11 points from last December, soon after the 2012 elections when the Republicans kept control of the chamber. Only 38% say it's a good thing the GOP controls the House, a 13-point dive from the end of last year.

 

[Neotrotsky]

poor attempts to change the subject will not take
away from the lies of Papa Obama

Of course, the reactionary lefts' estimates of the demise of the GOP are exaggerated
as much as the success of Papa Obamacare's website

To which your postings are a good example of ....

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

poor attempts to change the subject will not take
away from the lies of Papa Obama

Of course, the reactionary lefts' estimates of the demise of the GOP are exaggerated
as much as the success of Papa Obamacare's website

To which your postings are a good example of ....

There was no attempt to "change the subject" . I am sorry to inform I do not find what you have posted to be devastating to the ACA. The point of my post that you feel changes the subject actually counters your anecdotes with more global metrics as to the Health Care Act in the form of a poll:


The poll was conducted Friday through Sunday, just after the end of the 16-day partial federal government shutdown that was caused in part by a push by House conservatives to try and dismantle the health care law, which is President Barack Obama's signature domestic achievement.

My contention s that if a more general measure of how people feel is used then my position gains strength..

 

[Neotrotsky]

Fair enough

Then let us stay on topic of the thread




Obama also made this promise:


“I will sign a universal health-care bill into law by the end of my first term as president that will cover every American and cut the cost of a typical family’s premium by up to $2,500 a year.”

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tvBxCeGtf4]You Lied To Me - YouTube[/ame]

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Fair enough

Then let us stay on topic of the thread




Obama also made this promise:


“I will sign a universal health-care bill into law by the end of my first term as president that will cover every American and cut the cost of a typical family’s premium by up to $2,500 a year.”

You Lied To Me - YouTube

I am confident the topic of the thread is not "framing the health care issue to ensure grinding an Axe on Obama and the ACA"...it says the title is "the Real winners of the ACA"...that implies there are differences of opinions as to who has benefited for the law. My position is simply that albeit flawed ACA offers benefits to the American people.

 

[Zoom-boing]

oh the uninformed, they love to stay stupid shit ... the ones that don't pay are on medicaid they are establish by their income ...working income... raise the minimum wage above the poverty level, then they will pay for it themselves with a little assistance ...or hell how about getting those companies to pay for their health care who pays them next to nothing to work for them ... get those dead beats to pay ... there's two good Ideas ...

I pay for my health insurance. If you want to pay for your own and several others health insurance, feel free to do so. Just don't make a law that requires me too.

Before ObamaCare, EMTALA forced YOU paid for others' health care.

With ObamaCare, they must pay for their own.

WHY is that so hard to understand?

People with pre-existing conditions that can now get health insurance easier will not be paying a higher rate, even though they should because they are a higher risk due to having a pre-existing condition. Guess who is paying for their lowered rate? People will still be uncovered and will still go to the ER and we will still be paying for them. Maternity, newborn, ped care (including vision and dental) is now a MUST for everyone, whether you need it or not. Guess whose premiums will increase because of that? The (un)aca forces you to pay for other's health care. Why is that so hard to understand?

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

I would face head on the contention that Obama lied by pointing out he made political statements that are subject, as are all the "best laid plans of men and mice" , to a variety of unforeseeable contingencies that affect what occurs.
This reality is contained in legal document statements issued by Corporations and other legal entities that read as variations and elaborations on the following :

"These statements represent our reasonable judgment on the future based on various factors and using numerous assumptions and are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause our actual results and financial position to differ materially from those contemplated by the statements."

I believe that statements by President Obama should be analyzed and judged based on perspectives such as I have just described. To do otherwise may be seen as illogical and flawed and or biased..

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

I pay for my health insurance. If you want to pay for your own and several others health insurance, feel free to do so. Just don't make a law that requires me too.

Before ObamaCare, EMTALA forced YOU paid for others' health care.

With ObamaCare, they must pay for their own.

WHY is that so hard to understand?

People with pre-existing conditions that can now get health insurance easier will not be paying a higher rate, even though they should because they are a higher risk due to having a pre-existing condition. Guess who is paying for their lowered rate? People will still be uncovered and will still go to the ER and we will still be paying for them. Maternity, newborn, ped care (including vision and dental) is now a MUST for everyone, whether you need it or not. Guess whose premiums will increase because of that? The (un)aca forces you to pay for other's health care. Why is that so hard to understand?

The mandate to obtain Health insurance, in theory, will balance that pre-existing condition liability by bringing into the system younger healthier premium payers who it is recognized require less health care services. They benefit from having access to health care services for accidents and other health care contingencies.

It has been said that a camel is what happens when a horse is drawn up by committee...the ACA with its flaws and warts is a plan drawn up by committee of competing interests. It will need a lot of tweaking and reform so later generations might say "..this was their finest hour"...
from being able to remain on parents health plan until 26

 

[billyerock1991]

While partisan hackery abounds in this debacle...

Yes,
The real winners are the gangster insurance companies and the abortion industry.

The list of criminals include but are not limited to:
Cecile Richards, Planned Parenthood, unknown fortune in the blood of babies
The Kaiser Family Foundation - Immeasurable wealth made in the destruction of lives
Angela Braly, Wellpoint (Anthem) - reported over 13 million last year
Scott Serota, United Health Care - Unknown fortune in extortion
Bruce Broussard, Humana, reported 10 million last year
Karen Ignagni & Eric Schultz, AHIP - Unknown fortunes in extortion
Allen Wise, Coventry, reported 12 million last year

These evil people all financed the ACA, and are complicit criminals.
We are subject to the whims of evil people who have nothing to offer?
Really, what do they produce? Stress, exploitation, extortion, and finally death? This is worth trillions of dollars?

They are not "hard working", they are just evil beyond the imagination of normal hard woking people.
Why no discussion on their parts in this tragedy?

Why do we allow ourselves to be distracted by their bought and payed for media cronies?
Please do not forget that we all have been sold out by both "parties"!

When will we all realize that it is the gangster insurance comapanies that are the real problem?

many time we hear from the let the private sector run it because government can't run anything right ... in 2003 George Bush tried to get the social security trust fund run by the private sector... he also wanted medicare and medicare be run by the private sector and attempts were made which Bus and the republican party he met hard resistance from the people who were benefiting from a government run organization ... they want the government to buy from only US drug companies which the did finally get done...

here's what I find troubling ... here we get a health care program I realize you on the right don't like it... its all run by the private sector with the exception of you or I signing up for a private sector run business through the government ... the very thing these republicans have been trying to get done for years .... now we are buying health care from the very people you piss and moan about ... we are buy drugs from the private sector business ... the very companies you are piss and moan about here ... the only reason any of you on the right are pissing and moaning about it is because we liberals on the left said OK, we will do it your way ... we'll work with the privates sector in health care industries ... where you on the right have the gaul to call them "the gangster insurance companies and the abortion industry"... you demand for it then when we obliged you with working with the private sector and you still get nasty about it cause a liberal did through a black president did it... does anything make you happy ...

 

[Zoom-boing]

Before ObamaCare, EMTALA forced YOU paid for others' health care.

With ObamaCare, they must pay for their own.

WHY is that so hard to understand?

People with pre-existing conditions that can now get health insurance easier will not be paying a higher rate, even though they should because they are a higher risk due to having a pre-existing condition. Guess who is paying for their lowered rate? People will still be uncovered and will still go to the ER and we will still be paying for them. Maternity, newborn, ped care (including vision and dental) is now a MUST for everyone, whether you need it or not. Guess whose premiums will increase because of that? The (un)aca forces you to pay for other's health care. Why is that so hard to understand?

The mandate to obtain Health insurance, in theory, will balance that pre-existing condition liability by bringing into the system younger healthier premium payers who it is recognized require less health care services. They benefit from having access to health care services for accidents and other health care contingencies.

It has been said that a camel is what happens when a horse is drawn up by committee...the ACA with its flaws and warts is a plan drawn up by committee of competing interests. It will need a lot of tweaking and reform so later generations might say "..this was their finest hour"...
from being able to remain on parents health plan until 26

Oh please. People w/pe's should pay more because they are a higher risk. Non pe people shouldn't have to kick in more so the pe people can get a 'fairer deal'. Period.

Following the (un) aca logic, a 16 year old newly licensed driver should pay the same rate as a 30+ year accident free driver and homeowner's insurance should be the same for everyone, regardless of how much home you own.

 

[Freewill]

What fools we are. Any breakdown of health care costs that I have seen put administrative somewhere around 5 percent. Which if it were completely eliminated, which single payer would not do, it would only make a dent in cost. The truth is that we have to start liking paying for someone else to be on health care. We also have to accept paying 10 dollars for a bandaid in the emergency room. I have visited two hospitals in the last couple of years and both had Grand Pianos in their lobby playing all day. WTF does that have to do with medicine? The real crime in this whole thing is that Obama has taken care of the drug company. Someone please correct me but I have heard that the mail order of drugs to Canada was made illegal. Law suits have been brought up as a major factor in expense, I personally know of not one person who has ever sued and won against a doctor. I am sure there are some but is it really a major expense to the whole of health care? I don't wish to protect doctors who don't know what they are doing. As for the added tests, you damn well know everyone is taking a cut at the fee for running the test.

Any way here is a TRUE life cost of Obamacare.

I am paying about 371 dollars a month with subsidized health care. I would say that between my wife and I we may break even, in that we use about that much in health care a month, my guess is much less.

If I retire right now then I pay about 477 per month for the same coverage. Why the difference I am not knowing. That lasts until 2015 at which time my company has said they will drop retirees for Obama exchanges, with no monetary help. This is from a company that just gave their CEO a 4 million dollar raise.

I didn't do it myself but a person in the same position as I went and plugged in his numbers. 13,000 dollars per year for health care on Obama exchanges.

I guess I should be thankful I was so lucky as to have a job where I could work my ass off 60 hours a week and have my friends think me crazy for working so much. Now I think I am crazy for having to pay for their health care.

 

[billyerock1991]

Sounds real good. Then IRS agents can dictate how much you pay, when you pay, and garnishee your wages if you don't pay. Of course, if you don't have any wages, you win.

oh the uninformed, they love to stay stupid shit ... the ones that don't pay are on medicaid they are establish by their income ...working income... raise the minimum wage above the poverty level, then they will pay for it themselves with a little assistance ...or hell how about getting those companies to pay for their health care who pays them next to nothing to work for them ... get those dead beats to pay
... there's two good Ideas ...

Speaking of stupid, the IRS is the agency that collects money from taxpayers to fund the ACA the last time I checked.

No they are not ... where every you got that its beyond me ...the only thing the IRS does is, if you don't by health care you are sent in the mai By them to pay a tax for not buying health care ... the mount is base on your yearly income

I pay for my health insurance. If you want to pay for your own and several others feel free to do so. Just don't make a law that requires me to.

where ever you got that stupid idea that you were paying for someones health care is beyond me again ... you only pay for yourself that's it ... you aren't charged any tax to pay for people who can afford insurance...

The government has tried wage and price controls in the past and they didn't work.

Next!

what wage and price controls have to do with you buying health care is beyond me... here's where the government gets money to pay for the people who can't afford health care they put on medicaid or they get financial assistance to reduce their cost... there is a part of the ACA bill which charges a 2.2% tax to companies making medical equipment... this tax can be charge to the consumer ...

 

[billyerock1991]

oh the uninformed, they love to stay stupid shit ... the ones that don't pay are on medicaid they are establish by their income ...working income... raise the minimum wage above the poverty level, then they will pay for it themselves with a little assistance ...or hell how about getting those companies to pay for their health care who pays them next to nothing to work for them ... get those dead beats to pay ... there's two good Ideas ...

I pay for my health insurance. If you want to pay for your own and several others health insurance, feel free to do so. Just don't make a law that requires me too.

Before ObamaCare, EMTALA forced YOU paid for others' health care.

With ObamaCare, they must pay for their own.

WHY is that so hard to understand?

their brain washed

 

[billyerock1991]

Winners?
perhaps the IT people

Sebelius on the Run
The HHS Secretary refuses to testify about ObamaCare's rollout.

The Affordable Care Act's botched rollout has stunned its media cheering section, and it even seems to have surprised the law's architects. The problems run much deeper than even critics expected, and whatever federal officials, White House aides and outside contractors are doing to fix them isn't working. But who knows? Omerta is the word of the day as the Obama Administration withholds information from the public.

I would tell them to take a hike too ... she doesn't need their petty squabbling