(Results captured at 11:18 CT today.)
२ मे, २०१३
Who will be blamed for the unintended bad consequences of Obamacare?
Consider this poll at a Washington Post article: "Part-timers to lose pay amid health act's new math." Subheadline: "Some workers are having their hours cut so employers won't have to cover them under Obamacare. But many will benefit from the healthcare law's premium subsidies and Medicaid expansion."
(Results captured at 11:18 CT today.)
(Results captured at 11:18 CT today.)
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१६८ टिप्पण्या:
Who should be blamed? Is this a serious question?
Glad you screen captured that vote because the KosKids will emerge soon enough to spend the rest of their day in their basement voting YES.
Meth, the question was "who will be blamed" not who should be. We know who should be. We also know who will be (or won't be, as the case may be).
Are the bad consequences unintended?
Some workers are having their hours cut so employers won't have to cover them under Obamacare. But many will benefit from the healthcare law's premium subsidies and Medicaid expansion
So....some people will be working reduced hours. BUT the upside is that they are now classified as 'poor' so they get government welfare and subsidies.
Whoo Hooo. Win win. For ...someone.... I guess. I would rather not be poor and not have the wonderful benefit of government largess. I would also rather NOT be forced to subsidize the newly poor that have been created by this fiasco of Obamacare.
Who should be blamed......DEMOCRATS who voted 100% for this atrocity. Not only should they be blamed, they should be strung up in the public square.
The blame should be laid out as with a shotgun or buffets: A little for everyone.
Who will be blamed for the unintended bad consequences of Obamacare?
"...the previous administration...", that's who.
I blame the idiots that elected him. There. That was easy.
"Who will be blamed for the unintended bad consequences of Obamacare?"
I don't want to blame someone for the unintendend bad consequences of Obamacare. I want them fixed.
Can they blame Bush?
"We have to pass the bill so you can find out it's a trainwreck."
--Nancymax Pelosi-Baucus
Blame Romney, the mastermind?
Haha. Just kidding!
I want them fixed.
You're so cute, I wish I had a camera.
I don't want to blame someone for the unintendend bad consequences of Obamacare. I want them fixed.
Resulting most likely, in even more and even worse unintended consequences. The inevitable result of enacting legislation that no one had read prior to enacting it, and that no one can really understand.
I have a quibble with the thinking that the consequences are unintended. Obamacare is top to bottom designed to make the healthcare insurance market fail completely.
I don't want to blame someone for the unintendend bad consequences of Obamacare. I want them fixed.
And here I thought Robert Cook was the pie in the sky idealist.
Matthew, how do the employers in this scenario deserve any blame? All other courses of action have been rendered illegal.
unintendend bad consequences of Obamacare
Since the Democrats' endgame is to rule the rubble, are there really such things as "unintended bad" consequences?
Who should be blamed......DEMOCRATS who voted 100% for this atrocity. Not only should they be blamed, they should be strung up in the public square.
That's a tad harsh. I'd settle for exile. I wonder if the Italians would sell us Elba?
The intended consequences of ObamaCare are to destroy our health care system and force a 100% government take over.
ObamaCare is single payer's first step.
Do lefties EVER get the blame for the predictable, but bad unintended consequences of their policies?
Some workers are having their hours cut...But many will benefit from the healthcare law's premium subsidies and Medicaid expansion...
...because wards of the state are so much easier please.
And here I thought Robert Cook was the pie in the sky idealist.
Too hard to fix legislation? Must be Obama's fault then.
Who will be blamed?
Who is always blamed?
"Profiteers"
"Insurance companies"
"Doctors doing unnecessary tests"
That's who.
As said before, the left has no concept of incentives.
"I want them fixed"
Then you want to repeal it and pass a better law.
Who's standing around sipping a Slurpee now?
About 10 million people are going to lose their employered sponsored health insurance and 15 percent of current providers may stop taking Medicare patients at all.
But hey, let's "fix" this legislation with more government.
It will be swell. I'm sure.
Today's theme is blame.
Who takes the blame for Obamacare?
Perhaps it was an unidentified girl at a rap concert. Perhaps it was a sorority unclear of what they were doing. Perhaps it was a remote Chancellor or the students he bedeviled. Perhaps it was a quorum of legislators with their pants on backwards.
Obama needs to know who to blame.
I've been saying this for years! I work in a restaurant. Guess what's already happening to us? Hours are being cut.
This was totally predictable and so obvious that a nobody living in the sticks (me) saw it coming. What were the people writing the legislation thinking about?
"Fix" = "Repeal".
I wonder if the Italians would sell us Elba?
This makes me think of a statement made by Napoleon Bonapart about his exile to that island. I think it went like this: "Able was I ere I saw Elba."
But maybe I have that backwards.
What were the people writing the legislation thinking about?
How sexually excited they get by the prospects of being able to tell you what to do.
The answer to a failed government program is always the same: another government program. With more money and more control of course.
First you have to blame the failure of the original program on free markets though.
CEO-MMP said...
Meth, the question was "who will be blamed" not who should be. We know who should be. We also know who will be (or won't be, as the case may be).
You are right, I misread that, but then I went back and thought about it. Who should be blamed as opposed to who will be blamed? The more I thought about it, the more it was a distinction without a difference. I realize they are clearly distinct, but the real question should be who is doing the blaming?
Naturally the GOP will be blamed.
Brew Master is correct. Anybody who knows anything about the bill, which excludes idiots like Pelosi or Slo Joe, knows it was created to fail and bring on a single payer system.
rilApple said...
The intended consequences of ObamaCare are to destroy our health care system and force a 100% government take over.
This concept is called "failing upwards", where every failure at government health care programs (VA, Indian reservations, Medicare, Medicaid, ObamaCare) is somehow justification for even more government health care. It is, of course, the very definition of insanity.
phx said...
I don't want to blame someone for the unintendend bad consequences of Obamacare. I want them fixed.
You don't even realize that Urkelcare was supposed to be the fix. Now you want a fix for the broken fix? How much more broken do you want this to become? Government fixes nothing, they only create larger messes.
I can't wait until all these Obama voters lose their employer sponsored plans and get a Medicaid card.
That's going to be fun.
The Dems will say this are mere things to be fixed along with sufficient new taxes for funding.
Double down on complexity and stupidity.
Social Security has been the Demos' cash cow for 80 years.
They thought ObamaTax would stetch that out.
Now it looks like Social Security in reverse and the demos are running scared.
Just remember - You won!
PS and Barry, leading from his behind as always, hasn't got a freaking clue what's going on.
Too hard to fix legislation? Must be Obama's fault then.
Since the fix is repealing it and he would veto such an attempt, why yes, it is his fault.
So....some people will be working reduced hours. BUT the upside is that they are now classified as 'poor' so they get government welfare and subsidies.
I said before this law was passed that under Clinton we had Welfare reform that was designed to move people from welfare to work. Under Obama we have health care “reform” that is designed to move people from work to welfare.
One other point, this regarding Ann's thought that the Demos' plotting will somehow enable them to retake the House.
The real impact of this should be making itself felt just about October.
And the Demos wanted to be sure the Republicans got no credit, so all the votes are on their side.
HAHAHAHAHA!
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said millions of seniors will get dumped from their private Medicare Advantage plans by 2017 thanks to sharp payment cuts required by the law.
Good, time for these greedy geezers to pay the piper.
Government fixes nothing, they only create larger messes. -- Methadras
Hate to disagree with you, man, but you are wrong. The our loving and caring government sure fixed my wagon, for example. Big time.
the question was "who will be blamed" not who should be
Why George W. Bush will be blamed, of course.
"But many will benefit from the healthcare law's premium subsidies and Medicaid expansion."
Obviously unaware of the Baicker, et al. paper in NEJM. Or perhaps aware of it but practicing intellectual dishonesty.
What difference at this point ....
I'm not sure what is meant by "Unintended consequences" here.
I mean, conservatives said all this stuff will happen.
And Nancy laughed it off.
An easily identifed outcome is not an "Unintended consequence"
Republican obtstructionism will be blamed of course, just like it's being blamed for the continuing bad economy. I'm already seeing it happen.
Some workers are having their hours cut so employers won't have to cover them under Obamacare. But many will benefit from the healthcare law's premium subsidies and Medicaid expansion
So, the solution to government harming you is more government. The answer to losing income from having one's hours cut is to increase spending, which requires an increase of taxes on employers, which will need to reduce pay and cut hours to pay for it.
Great -- the worker gets screwed every way around.
But here's a solution that they will never adopt -- government just leaves us all the hell alone.
phx: "Too hard to fix legislation?"
Define what needs to be fixed and what the fix is, from your perspective.
Then we can talk.
Or are you preparing us for the inevitable dem ploy of "we have to pass the fix before we can know what's in it"?
Since the fix is repealing it
No that's unacceptable from what I can see. Fix, not repeal.
DrMaturin: "I'm already seeing it happen."
You meant to say that you are continuing to see it happen, since it's been happening all along.
If it hasn't already been said, Obamacare is nothing more than the prelude to single payer. It will crush the smaller carriers under the weight of regulation, leaving a few of the larger ones to bear the burden. They will ultimately become quasi governmental agencies along the lines of Fannie & Freddie.
What could go wrong?
phx: "Fix, not repeal."
Still waiting to hear what needs to be "fixed" from your perspective and what the "fix" is, from your perspective.
LOL
I know, I know.
We'll be waiting a very very long time for that.
But many will benefit from the healthcare law's premium subsidies and Medicaid expansion."
Medicaid, really?
the authors concluded that, “This randomized, controlled study showed that Medicaid coverage generated no significant improvements in measured health outcomes in the first two years, but it did increase use of health services, raise rates of diabetes detection and management, lower rates of depression, and reduce financial strain.”
phx said...
Since the fix is repealing it
No that's unacceptable from what I can see. Fix, not repeal.
No, it needs to be repealed. phx wants to fix the Titanic after it's been on the bottom for 100 years.
(gee, phx sounds as if the Lefty apocalypse might be in just a smidge of trouble; may be time to go back to being conciliatory)
No that's unacceptable from what I can see. Fix, not repeal.
Unacceptable to you perhaps. You're basically asking the group that admittedly did not know what was in the bill when it was initially passed to go back and 'fix' a bill that they still probably don't have a clue about.
Personally I find your faith in the competence of Congress disturbing. The biggest problem with government; from the local to the Federal level is that they truly believe there is a legislative solution to every problem.
"Who should be blamed? Is this a serious question?"
I don't know. You're the one who's asking it.
It's not my question.
gee, phx sounds as if the Lefty apocalypse might be in just a smidge of trouble
As the Lefty apocalypse goes, so goes Indiana.
phx said...
"Who will be blamed for the unintended bad consequences of Obamacare?"
I don't want to blame someone for the unintendend bad consequences of Obamacare. I want them fixed.
It's good to see the left in favor of repeal.
phx said...
Since the fix is repealing it
No that's unacceptable from what I can see. Fix, not repeal.
Whoops, we're back to legislating a unicorn for everyone.
> No that's unacceptable from what I can see. Fix, not repeal.
You want it fixed, you get to propose the fix, and take the blame when that goes wrong. Until then, you get the blame for the broken system because you continue to support it. ("better than nothing", aka repeal, is support.)
BTW - Why do you think that it can be fixed? "I want" isn't actually a reason.
Still waiting to hear what needs to be "fixed" from your perspective and what the "fix" is, from your perspective.
Whatever problems you have with the legislation. From my perspective, I haven't had any problems with it yet.
I'm just saying if there are problems fix the goddamn problems. And yes, I know how hard that is for the worst congress ever.
phx said...
I'm just saying if there are problems fix the goddamn problems.
It is hilarious that you come here and tell people they can't make an argument.
Note that you are simply incapable of admitting there are problems.
Note you are incapable suggesting how the problems would be fixed - saying "fix it" isn't how.
You're not that bright.
It is hilarious that you come here and tell people they can't make an argument.
What are you talking about? You can make all the arguments you want. Why would I care about your arguments?
What were the people writing the legislation thinking about?
When is my re-election?
I don't understand why they chose to model France's work policy.
phx said...
What are you talking about?
I'm talking about the fact that you come here and routinely accuse people of being unable to make an argument.
Said comments by you, as we see with your pathetic "fix it" responses, are projection.
thanks
I don't want to blame someone for the unintendend bad consequences of Obamacare. I want them fixed.
The fix is called repeal.
The morons who fucked everything up will not permit that to happen.
Do lefties EVER get the blame for the predictable, but bad unintended consequences of their policies?
Nah. As Jonah Goldberg noted, failures by conservatives are conservative failures. Failures by Progressives are failures by AMERICA writ large.
No that's unacceptable from what I can see.
Then YOU are the problem.
Then YOU are the problem.
I know. It's phx's fault.
You can't fix ObamaCare since it's excessive size and complexity makes it nearly impossible to do so. Additionally you cannot fix ObamaCare because the result is pointless. ObamaCare does not itself solve the problems it is supposed to solve so fixing it to offset the problems it creates leaves with the original problems still unsolved.
The reality is that the only way to have a worthwhile functioning healthcare system, as far as I can see, is one where the stakeholders actually have skin in the game. E.g. where the people receiving the healthcare, the patients, are also responsible for paying the bills. Whether those bills are health insurance bills or funds deducted from health savings accounts with the direct connection between healthcare consumption and cost you will end up with a dysfunctional system.
Additionally ObamaCare does not address other important issues such as tort reform and limitations on litigation which causes a massive bloat in costs as medical providers engage in defensive medicine in order to avoid enormous payouts. Especially since such efforts detract from providing good healthcare services in the first place because of the overemphasis on defensive measures.
And the whole "electronic health records" schtick has to be rethought because it has been larded up with so much nonsense that it has now gone from something promising to something of a Frankenstein with excessive mandates on acquiring data from patients that governments really don't have any business in getting.
Said comments by you, as we see with your pathetic "fix it" responses, are projection.
thanks
TNOI
phx said...
gee, phx sounds as if the Lefty apocalypse might be in just a smidge of trouble
As the Lefty apocalypse goes, so goes Indiana.
Whatever that may mean...
"Many will benefit from expansion of Medicaid" seems questionable. See:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/01/study-medicaid-reduces-financial-hardship-doesnt-quickly-improve-physical-health/
BUT the upside is that they are now classified as 'poor' so they get government welfare and subsidies.
That's the desired end. More dependent Democrats to enrich the Democrat bigwigs. Beggars don't complain as much as independent humans.
Until the government welfare and subsidies need to be cut.
Climate change?
"I don't want to blame someone for the unintendend bad consequences of Obamacare. I want them fixed."
Right.
1) Accountability is only for Republicans.
2) There is no fixing "the unintendend bad consequences of Obamacare," although too many idiots will try to do so, and too many other idiots will cheer them on.
Nobody puts the "passive" in passive-aggressive like phx does.
From my perspective, I haven't had any problems with it yet.
Because its all about you ;-)
On the other hand, a significant number of businesses do, including quite a few companies that have obtained waivers in implementation.
I'm still trying to determine if the coverage I offer will meet the mandates and if not, I might just drop coverage altogether and let my guys to to the exchange because I've already run the numbers and can tell you I can't afford it.
But as long as you're ok....
Nobody puts the "passive" in passive-aggressive like phx does.
Ouch.
I read that article earlier this morning and voted. I was surprised by the results, but I'm sure as liberals get out of bed this afternoon and begin to vote, the results will change.
I know you didn't ask the question, but rather posted it. It was meant to be rhetorical.
Reagan, Bush, Cheney and Halliburton should be blamed.
On the other hand, a significant number of businesses do, including quite a few companies that have obtained waivers in implementation.
I'm still trying to determine if the coverage I offer will meet the mandates and if not, I might just drop coverage altogether and let my guys to to the exchange because I've already run the numbers and can tell you I can't afford it.
I understand. And I'm saying if there are problems like that congress should act in a bipartisan manner to fix them. And they should implement tort reform -in a bipartisan manner.
I know you want it repealed. I disagree.
phx said...
Since the fix is repealing it
No that's unacceptable from what I can see. Fix, not repeal.
And yet you can't or don't state what the fix is. The system will be worse than the way it was. The excuses used of 30 million uninsured to implement it will not captured. Harry Reid is now saying that more money should be spent to fix it from becoming a train wreck. How iconic to use that terminology of a 'train wreck' with respect to spending more money on Urkelcare to fix it. It's being Amtracked. Brilliant.
I know you didn't ask the question, but rather posted it. It was meant to be rhetorical.
I thought it was obvious too. Maybe you should quit this thing....;-)
Will the fact that there are so many problems make anyone reconsider the idea that Republicans push back against Obama's ideas strictly out of intransigence?
It seems to me this is a lesson for Dems to consider actually listening to their critics.
Drago said...
phx: "Fix, not repeal."
Still waiting to hear what needs to be "fixed" from your perspective and what the "fix" is, from your perspective.
LOL
I know, I know.
We'll be waiting a very very long time for that.
He doesn't know because he's never read the legislation, but it's easy for him to say fix it without any other substantiation for why and how.
If Obama was serious about universal, affordable health care, then he would have first addressed progressive inflation and supply. Instead, his objective was to create yet another slush fund for his interests, thereby sponsoring corruption of individuals, institutions, and government.
No that's unacceptable from what I can see. Fix, not repeal.
You're suggesting it was broken when it was passed, then. This would put the burden of irresponsible governance on a Democrat-controlled Congress and Administration, who rammed it through using procedural bullshit and gave exemptions to only a handful (relatively) of employers.
And...then tried to get out of it themselves.
Repeal. Start from scratch.
"study-medicaid-reduces-financial-hardship-doesnt-quickly-improve-physical-health"
Doesn't improve health over the course of the study. And this IS a zero-sum game. If it reduces the Medicaid recipient's financial hardship, it does so at the expense of other people. And it's even worse, since they also determined that the Medicaid recipients used more services than the control population not on Medicaid (and why not when somebody else is paying for it?).
The excuses used of 30 million uninsured to implement it will not captured
And that never was a real problem. As such, ObamaCare is a solution to a problem that did not exist.
But now we are going from young and healthy people spending less than a hundred dollars per year on health expenses (for things like aspirin and cold medicine) to having to spend about $4,000 per year on health insurance that they do not need and exists only to subsidize other people, not to mention enriching the insurance companies (which were all very hot to trot in having the individual mandate enacted).
There is not a situation in the world so bad that the United States Congress can't - or won't - step in to help, and make matters still worse.
"...make anyone reconsider the idea that Republicans push back against Obama's ideas strictly out of intransigence?"
Unlikely. I listened to a bit of the public radio call-in show "On Point", and the callers were split between thinking the R.'s were bigots or that they were petulant children.
You're suggesting it was broken when it was passed, then. This would put the burden of irresponsible governance on a Democrat-controlled Congress and Administration, who rammed it through using procedural bullshit and gave exemptions to only a handful (relatively) of employers.
And...then tried to get out of it themselves.
Fine whatever. It's the Dems fault. Just fix it, no repeal.
phx said...
Then YOU are the problem.
I know. It's phx's fault.
Do you have anything serious to contribute other than, fix it? If not, you have zero credibility on this subject. Either put of shut the fuck up and just observe from over yonder.
Colonel Angus said...
I know you didn't ask the question, but rather posted it. It was meant to be rhetorical.
I thought it was obvious too. Maybe you should quit this thing....;-)
I'm waiting for the cue to facepalm or double facepalm. Softly of course.
"And I'm saying if there are problems like that congress should act in a bipartisan manner to fix them."
It wasn't rammed down our throats in a bipartisan manner. Let those who passed it in order to find out what's in it fix it. It's their fault and their fault alone.
If Obama was serious about universal, affordable health care
Can we be clear about something here, something crucial?
ObamaCare is not and never was about "health care." It is and always has been about vast transfers of money.
Not one person is guaranteed or otherwise provided actual health care under ObamaCare. Instead, what they are guaranteed is having to pay a premium. Period. They are guaranteed having to pay into the system. There is no guarantee that they will actually be provided medical treatment in exchange.
I know a young woman who is a manager at McDonalds, she works for a franchise rather than a corporate store. She was told all the insurance coverage was being dropped.
They are one of the companies that received wavers, guess their time is up.
phx said...
You're suggesting it was broken when it was passed, then. This would put the burden of irresponsible governance on a Democrat-controlled Congress and Administration, who rammed it through using procedural bullshit and gave exemptions to only a handful (relatively) of employers.
And...then tried to get out of it themselves.
Fine whatever. It's the Dems fault. Just fix it, no repeal.
Translation: I give up. I'm a dog, laying on my side, lifting my leg so you can be the dominant one and I can get a scratch on the belly like a good submissive should.
Dude, you are not getting off that easy. Literally or figuratively. You're mental laziness now has you on par with that delusional dementia driven drech, inga. Talk about deliberately lowering the bar.
Do you have anything serious to contribute other than, fix it? If not, you have zero credibility on this subject. Either put of shut the fuck up and just observe from over yonder.
Uh huh. And remind me again where your credibility comes from?
Bender said...
If Obama was serious about universal, affordable health care
Can we be clear about something here, something crucial?
ObamaCare is not and never was about "health care." It is and always has been about vast transfers of money.
Not one person is guaranteed or otherwise provided actual health care under ObamaCare. Instead, what they are guaranteed is having to pay a premium. Period. They are guaranteed having to pay into the system. There is no guarantee that they will actually be provided medical treatment in exchange.
Not only are we clear on that. I believe this has been brought up on althouse and known for a long time. Everyone in congress knows that $1.6 trillion of wealth is a massive transfer payment of theft to democrat leftist special interests. SCOTUS more or less cemented the deal by calling it a massive tax. The rest is window dressing couched as pretend medical care faking itself as a service to the uninsured and the poor.
Dude, you are not getting off that easy. Literally or figuratively. You're mental laziness...
Don't tell me...because I didn't read the legislation, right?
All you're saying is "repeal it!" Is that some sort of model of intellectual vigor?
phx said...
Fine whatever. It's the Dems fault. Just fix it, no repeal.
It's like he can't figure out the government fairy wand doesn't actually fix things.
"This time say 'Republican' when you wave it!"
Phx has a charming faith in the people who fucked it up in the first place being able to fix it.
Get a clue. It's not fixable. It's like saying fix Frankenstein's monster after he rampages and the citizenry are storming the castle with torches and pitchforks.
Barry thought fixing health care was the linchpin to fixing the economy, as if our slowdown could be attributed to would-be artists, musicians, and hipster doofi who couldn't unleash their awesomeness on the marketplace because they were busy scrounging for health care. Apparently Barry thinks when there is no demand, increase the supply! It's Krugmanomics!
Why is nobody poking holes in this failed assumption upon which Barry built his unwieldy edifice?
would someone please polish Obama's turd for phx?
phx said...
Do you have anything serious to contribute other than, fix it? If not, you have zero credibility on this subject. Either put of shut the fuck up and just observe from over yonder.
Uh huh. And remind me again where your credibility comes from?
As an engineer that works in the medical industry working closely with doctors, surgeons, other medical professionals from an engineering point of view and from one on how medical device development impacts use, public policy, FDA regulatory requirements in the 5k/10k arena, to how product development affects care, wellness, interactivity, usage cases between the medical industry to patient care and how these developments dovetail with past, current, and future legislation. I also work very closely and on certain occasions am on retainer with a couple of law firms to provide expert advice and other services if need be on this front. I'd say I have a pretty good idea and a solid footing of credibility on a lot of the legal ramifications of Urkelcare on my business and in my industry. I've read the entirety of the legislation as it currently stands. Have you?
You aren't even very good at misdirection and deflection. Once again, your credibility is zero. I think this line of retort sort of proves it. Put up or STFU.
They are one of the companies that received wavers, guess their time is up.
In fast food, some restaurants are privately owned and some are corporate. The waiver for McDonalds could have only covered corporate employees.
My understanding of how fast food normally works is that the employees of your neighborhood location (assuming it's privately owned) work for a guy who has a company that owns that franchise. They do not work for McDonalds.
phx said...
Dude, you are not getting off that easy. Literally or figuratively. You're mental laziness...
Don't tell me...because I didn't read the legislation, right?
Reading the legislation in part or in whole imparts a level of understanding, at least on your part that would give you, at minimum a sort of plan view of what the legislation really entails. Even if you've read a modicum of it, outside of the legalese heavily embedded in it, you would at least have a footing to speak from. You don't. Hence, my remark on your credibility on the subject being zero.
All you're saying is "repeal it!" Is that some sort of model of intellectual vigor?
I said no such thing. Again, this is the type of stupidity that I routinely run into with shallow thinking moronic leftists like you. You trot into these conversation with a paper and a latte in hand and try to ineffectually entrain yourself into the conversation pretending you have some kind of knowledge or expertise. You don't. Now run along and go play in the street.
Fine whatever. It's the Dems fault. Just fix it, no repeal.
You remind me that we haven't had a Great Gatsby quote around here for a while:
"They were careless people, Tom and Daisy—they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made."
You aren't even very good at misdirection and deflection. Once again, your credibility is zero. I think this line of retort sort of proves it. Put up or STFU.
That's fine. If you've got anything to say other than "repeal it" feel free to knock my socks off.
But thanks for your resume. I'll let you know if we are hiring any cantankerous engineers in the near future.
phx said...
Fine whatever. It's the Dems fault. Just fix it, no repeal.
Wow.
You're very intellectual.
Very knowledgeable on the topic too.
phx said...
That's fine. If you've got anything to say other than "repeal it" feel free to knock my socks off.
Says the person who can't muster up anything other than "fix it"
Fix what?
OH, you don't know. You can't bring yourself to understand what the problems are.
You just know that when things don't go well, Congress gets together and "fixes" them.
It must be fun to be so stupid.
I said no such thing.
So what do you think we should do?
phx said...
You aren't even very good at misdirection and deflection. Once again, your credibility is zero. I think this line of retort sort of proves it. Put up or STFU.
That's fine. If you've got anything to say other than "repeal it" feel free to knock my socks off.
But thanks for your resume. I'll let you know if we are hiring any cantankerous engineers in the near future.
And... the little child takes his ball and goes home. As I've said, I never said repeal. So far, you haven't even gotten off the potato chip encrusted couch to even bother putting your socks on for me to knock them out. Frankly, I'm not even going to waste my time on you anymore. You've just proven you know nothing about everything.
We have been told at meetings to expect that patients will in fact blame physicians, and not Congress, for the coming clusterfuck.
Although they used different words.
Frankly, I'm not even going to waste my time on you anymore.
Wait! Don't go.
What do you think we should do?
Tamerlan Tsarnaev was on at least three different Federal agencies' watch lists, but the different systems could not "talk" to each other, and he went undetected until he blew up the marathon.
And this is the same Government you expect to have every citizen (and also eligible "undocumented Democrats") in one humongous database which every Federal agency, insurance company, and medical facility in the country will be integrated with so as to coordinate their actions?
I know. It's phx's fault.
Fix the problem
The entire bill is the problem. Every problem was pretty obvious before it passed. We have to repeal it because it cannot be fixed.
I don't want to do that...I just want it fixed
As said earlier, once the Titanic sunk, you couldn't do a lot to fix it on the ocean floor.
They aren't "unintended bad consequenes." The problems are the obvious result when fucking morons try to pass legislation they didn't read about an issue they have no clue how to fix.
And I'm saying if there are problems like that congress should act in a bipartisan manner to fix them.
Can you provide any reason why a Republican would do a thing to fix a disaster they opposed, that they said would be a disaster, and who were ignored and ridiculed throughout?
Especially when Democrats are still trying to blame them for the abortion of a law they passed.
Fine whatever. It's the Dems fault. Just fix it, no repeal.
Again, why should the Republicans do ANYTHING to help? This was a bill that has failed exactly as they said it would fail.
If you do not want it repealed, don't ask people who recognized how bad an idea it was to come up with ideas to fix it.
All you're saying is "repeal it!" Is that some sort of model of intellectual vigor?
Far moreso than demanding bipartisan support to fix a brutally and thoroughly partisan bill.
You want a bipartisan solution? Repeal the disaster FIRST.
Fixing it would require repealing basically all of it. It'd be quicker to list the parts of the legislation that work.
...which is your cue, mind you.
We have been told at meetings to expect that patients will in fact blame physicians, and not Congress, for the coming clusterfuck.
It's why numerous states refuse to participate. Because they will have no say over the program, but will get all of the blame for the budgetary issues and service problems.
It's why Scott is likely too stupid to be an effective governor of FL any longer. Ditto Kasich in OH.
I'm just so happy lefty dimwits like phx take to the Internet to inform us that "if" there are "problems" with a 10,000 page + piece of legislation and the accompanying 30,000+ pages of regulaton, things nobody in America have ever tried before, Congress, who foisted said legislation on an American public who did not want it, can simply vote to "fix" it.
Really. I am so glad people who take such a view of the world had their preferred Presidential candidate win the last election.
This will all turn out swell.
I'm just so happy lefty dimwits like phx take to the Internet to inform us that "if" there are "problems" with a 10,000 page + piece of legislation and the accompanying 30,000+ pages of regulaton, things nobody in America have ever tried before, Congress, who foisted said legislation on an American public who did not want it, can simply vote to "fix" it.
That's what you're stuck with. It's not going to be repealed. Even if Romney won it wouldn't be repealed. Your options are to leave it as it is or fix what can be fixed in a bipartisan manner.
A significant problem with O-care is that it expands the definition of "basic" care, which every single plan must offer, to include things I don't want or need and will never use, such as:
maternity care, screening for gestational diabetes, breast-feeding *support* and supplies, pediatric care, pediatric vision and dental care
mental health and drug abuse treatment
domestic violence screening
immunizations
But all of the plans available MUST offer these services and/or products, so we are compelled to pay for them.
Each plan must also cover every "preventive service" ranked A or B by the US Preventive Services Task Force. When I checked at the beginning of the year, nothing had been ranked yet, but just now I see they've come up with a smorgasbord, to which I have no doubt they'll be adding. Again, we're not allowed to opt out of any of this. There should be no surprise! surprise! that, already, the basic plan is going to be much more expensive than they'd originally promised, with all these requirements
The problem is that the computer system required to implement ObamaCare is out of fantasy fiction and cannot be created here on earth.
My theory is that ObamaCare is caused by the success of Global Warming cartoon movies tempting the Politicians to think a cartoon of health care is all we will ever notice. It's the Christians and the Koch brothers who cause everything...just watch the cartoons and STFU.
Your options are to leave it as it is or fix what can be fixed in a bipartisan manner.
Seeing as how the Democrat leadership in Congress were trying to exempt themselves and staff from the mandate, favored constituencies like unions are have already been granted waivers, etc...
...oh, yeah, the "fix" is in, alright. In the same "bipartisan manner" in which it was enacted.
Well, things may looked kinda fucked up right now, but at least we didn't elect a guy who once put his dog on the roof of his car.
More of phx's "fix":
Twenty Percent of New Healthcare Waivers Are In Nancy Pelosi’s District
That's what you're stuck with. It's not going to be repealed.
phx: Do you sit on the right or the left of Zeus at the high council table on Mt. Olympus?
I don't claim to know if it will be repealed. We've never passed such a huge, unworkable, abortion of a bill in our history. But repeal is a definite possibility, and I'm quite sure preferable to fixing.
I doubt it can be fixed. It's such an ill-thought-out bill, top to bottom, that like a a bad building it should be razed to the ground, before any new work is attempted.
It's going to collapse, one way or another. The costs alone guarantee it.
That's what you are stuck with.
Instead of pummeling poor phx here, has anyone checked out the comments at Kos or any of the other usual suspects?
furious_a said...
More of phx's "fix":
Twenty Percent of New Healthcare Waivers Are In Nancy Pelosi’s District
In fact this is the answer: the next Republican President should grant a waiver to every individual, group sponsor, state, and insurance company who asks for one. Problem solved.
Maybe the left will realize a President with authority to waive legislation isn't a good idea. Well, that's probably asking too much.
What do you think we should do?
Repeal it and create a reform bill that works? Novel concept I know.
The reason I say repeal it is because when companies that would normally be bound to the regulations are instead granted waivers, that tells any intelligent person its a bad law.
Obama and the liberal democrats wanted single payer but they knew the country was opposed to that so instead they crafted this giant shit sandwich because, well something had to be done!
Your options are to leave it as it is or fix what can be fixed in a bipartisan manner.
Nope. The option is to let it wither and die on the vine, as it will. To get the voters so pissed at the people who forced them on this that they suffer the consequences.
Conservatives have 100% clean hands on this issue.
Democrats have been trying to get out from under it themselves. As have their cronies. They want to fuck you and protect themselves.
The problem is that the computer system required to implement ObamaCare is out of fantasy fiction and cannot be created here on earth.
Hell, if it could, can we trust the government to keep stuff secret?
If a hospital leaks data, they are punished financially.
If HHS does --- what the hell happens there? Nobody would even get fired.
Maybe the left will realize a President with authority to waive legislation isn't a good idea. Well, that's probably asking too much.
Thing is --- there is, literally, no evidence that these waivers are legal. Their legality certainly isn't mentioned in the legislation itself.
It won't be noticed until a conservative tries to do this.
Any law where a President is allowed to unilaterally exempt people from the law isn't a just law and nobody should be compelled to follow it.
Democrats: Going from Socialist to Feudalist Before Your Very Eyes!
Waivers -- are they supposed to be temporary?
Or are they like so many other laws in Obamaland: we enforce 'em when and how we want to.
Needless to say, Dems and Reps are working behind the scenes to exempt their staffs from Obamacare.
phx said...
Frankly, I'm not even going to waste my time on you anymore.
Wait! Don't go.
What do you think we should do?
You got nuthin, then.
Our company has always offered and subsidised a top-of-the-line health plan at very low cost to the employees who wanted it. The affordability, efficiency, and effectiveness saved my life twice, and a few others that work here. Nearly everyone else has benefited greatly from it, and loved it. It's called "the old system" now.
At best, Obamacare will replace that with a mediocre plan, with less access, and at significant extra cost to the employee with extended wait times. Longer wait times would have cost me my life a few years back.
Employees will suffer all the bad consequences of this law, including the much higher costs. Companies will pass that all on to employees. There is no place else to get it. Here it will also cost them all or most of the regular employee bonuses and raises we use to share profits.
In addition, we will try to avoid hiring anybody we don't absolutely have to, which is the opposite of our mission.
We have to survive, and we have to protect the people we already have. There is no alternative for now.
It's a huge step backward. Not everyone here took the insurance we offered, but in 30 years nobody suffered from not getting treatment. They simply went to the county hospital, and had to sit in the waiting room a little longer. I've taken homeless people to the hospital. Everyone I ever knew got the care they needed.
Sure, it was unfair, those of us who paid, had to pay in our premiums for the cost of the freeloaders, and they didn't get as good an experience as us payers, but it was affordable, and workable. Now it's neither, and all the extra cost is not going to care, but to insurance companies, new bureaucracy, and waste. An incredibly stupid and cruel law.
Who will be blamed? (All together now): BUSH!!!!!!11!!!!!
bagho20: I keep thinking you're a great guy...
To get the voters so pissed at the people who forced them on this that they suffer the consequences.
How'd that work for FAA's sequester mongering?
Conservatives have 100% clean hands on this issue.
Only because the Narrative-based Community, er, mainstream press, hasn't gotten around to re-writing that part of history yet.
"Conservatives have 100% clean hands on this issue."
Just on this one vote, but they could have put forth smart, market based reforms earlier, like creating much more competition with interstate commerce, and getting employers out of the health insurance business. It has nothing to do with having a job.
One of the reasons we end up with a lot of stupid leftist legislation is that the GOP does not really embrace free market economics. They simply wait for the left to do something stupid and then bitch and moan, just to end up helping to pass it anyway. This time they didn't, and it's miracle.
I still think the right will get blamed. The kids never blame themselves for their problems, no matter how obvious the connection. Being liberal means never having to say you're sorry.
"bagho20: I keep thinking you're a great guy"
That's all part of my sock puppet plan. Next, we get you a sex change.
they could have put forth smart, market based reforms earlier
...maybe they remembered the savaging Paul Ryan endured for proposing premium support and block-granting for Medicare.
Phuck phx and his 'just fix it/bipartisan' bullshit.
We've seen this newsreel too many times.
Results are still pretty much the same: 80/20.
Bagoh, i am not blind to the reality that Republicans are pro big business but not pro free market. But with this issue, they are pure as the wind driven wind.
Also, the few times they have tried to champion the free market, they get blasted. Bush's goal to save Social Security died an ugly death.
"Also, the few times they have tried to champion the free market, they get blasted."
Then we should hire ones that have the balls for the job. Because if all they have to do is have a bitch fit to get you to back down, guess what happens. This is the big debate on the right every election. Pick the RINO to win, or the real conservative on principle. Conservatives lose either way with RINOS.
THe new narrative is this the republican plan from 1 sentence in an article from The Heritage Foundation.
The way to fix Obamacare is already implemented. Because LASIK eye surgery and cosmetic surgery are not deemed important enough for the government to interfere with these treatments are cheaper and safer than ever. All we need to do is have the government decide to leave everything else alone as well.
The percentages haven't changed all that much. It's only 21% yes.
I wish I could take some satisfaction in saying, "I told you so" to all those I know who voted for and advocated for this crap and praised the SOB's who passed it, but seeing everything come to pass as I knew it would only makes me very sad. They've taken the best medicine the world had and ruined it. How's that saying go - "The enemy of the good is the perfect?"
sydney: It's usually "The perfect is the enemy of the good" for impact, but yeah, I know the feeling.
It was obvious from the beginning Obamacare was a dead-stupid monstrosity that would fail horribly. "I told you so" is no consolation at all.
phx-
Fixing it is not an option, the flaws are foundational.
The possible options are:
Total Repeal: This will never happen as long as the Democrats control at least 40 seats in the Senate
Partial Repeal: Repeal of a few of the worst provisions, only possible if the Democrats believe that they will take the large majority of the blame. Not likely with the current media.
Do Nothing: Republicans can try this, in the hopes that the Democrats will get the blame for the problems that they caused by passing the ACA. However, the Democrats and much of the media will claim that the Republicans obstructed 'fixes' for the problems, so the Republicans may get blamed anyway.
Bipartisan 'Fixes': The Republicans can work with the Democrats to pass 'fixes' for the problems. However, the 'fixes' will cause other, (blatantly obvious) unintended consequences. They just won't be obvious until after the next election. Lather, Rinse, Repeat. If the Republican work with the Democrats on the fixes, they relieve the Democrats of the blame for the current problems, and share the blame for the future ones.
Ignorance: If it were mostly a matter of politics, I'd agree with your analysis.
However, I believe Obamacare will be such a hideous clusterf*** that it will hurt even very important people, as well as tens of millions of ordinary citizens. Then it will be like the FAA furloughing. Both sides of Congress will find a way to resolve it.
But you're right the Democrats remain powerful and they may dig in their heels, and it's hard to say how badly things get before everyone snaps.
I'm no fan of O-Care but it seems the only people who hate it are his opposition. And no one (except ed) has any ideas to replace it. The Reps may complain but as long as O-Care stemmed from Romneycare *and* they refuse to make an alternative plan, no one will listen to them and repeal - there's no replace. Cantor made one plan and the Reps didn't even try to pass it.
Regardless of some leftist plot, Americans will see Republicans as doing nothing but whining. Just like blacks during the New Deal, they will accept "half a loaf" of health care rather than nothing at all.
Sabinal: That's a scenario.
That's how Obama figured the sequestration/FAA furloughing would go, but the chaos and pain it caused was sufficient that his scheme to get the public to blame Republicans blew up in his face.
It's a matter of how badly Obamacare fails. If it turns out to be a huge train wreck, all the talk about Romneycare and Republican obstructionism went matter.
Sabinal said...
...the only people who hate it are his opposition.
In other words, anyone who is paying attention.
And no one (except ed) has any ideas to replace it.
Plenty of us have ideas to replace it. But the starting point of any replacement is to understand that the old system was better than the ACA, therefore the starting point has to be repeal.
...they will accept "half a loaf" of health care rather than nothing at all.
But the old system was not nothing at all. It was a system where most people had decent healthcare, and everyone could get emergency treatment. Yes, it had its problems. Many of those problems were the direct result of government policies.
Repeal and Tweak ( I know, that's a great slogan to run on. )
Here is my list of tweaks:
Tort Reform
Equal tax savings for employer plans or individual plans
Allow insurance to be sold across state lines
Flexible Spending Account reform- no more use it or lose it, allow changes to contributions through the year.
Government support for infectious disease control. ( Vaccines, TB, Staph infections, etc. )
Beyond that, I'd consider a government-run insurance program for people with pre-existing conditions. Preferably at the state level.
The goal should be a system where, for most people, in most years, they pay 100% of their medical expenses out-of-pocket. They also should have catastrophic coverage ( ie insurance ) to cover things like cancer, stroke, major car accident, etc.
@Ignorance is Bliss
But the old system was not nothing at all. It was a system where most people had decent healthcare, and everyone could get emergency treatment. Yes, it had its problems.
And that's the nut of it. Defenders of Obamacare, in which I count Sabinal, keep making it a false choice between Obamacare or no healthcare reform.
Just because the current system has problems doesn't mean that any alternative must be better.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा