Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
yeah. having larger pools of people and thereby lowering prices is a terrible idea.
how much have the prices gone down?
Indeed, it's a big year and a lot of folks will have their hands full getting the word out to people about the new options that will be available to them this fall.
Meanwhile, last week we found out that folks generally want their states to get going on these new marketplaces: Poll Finds Bipartisan Public Support for Creating State Insurance Exchanges Despite Continuing Party Divisions Over the ACA
Princeton, N.J.A majority of Americans put the creation of state-based health insurance exchanges at the top of the priority list for health policy in their state this year, according to a survey released today by the Kaiser Family Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Harvard School of Public Health.
Fifty-five percent of the public, including majorities of Republicans and Democrats, say that establishing the exchangesa key element of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and one whose implementation has divided states along partisan political linesis a top priority for their governor and legislature. So far 18 states and the District of Columbia have declared that they will create their own state-based exchanges, seven other states have opted to establish exchanges in partnership with the federal government and 25 otherssome driven by resistance to the ACAappear set to default to a federally-run exchange.
Governors are largely splitting along partisan lines on the exchanges, but the public is not. People like the idea, said Drew Altman, President and CEO of the Kaiser Family Foundation.
ONce again, FACTS triumph over neocon/teabagger panic propaganda and wishful thinking.
ONce again, FACTS triumph over neocon/teabagger panic propaganda and wishful thinking.
I'm not a neocon, or a 'teabagger', but none of these 'facts' are relevant my objections to PPACA.
Indeed, it's a big year and a lot of folks will have their hands full getting the word out to people about the new options that will be available to them this fall.
Meanwhile, last week we found out that folks generally want their states to get going on these new marketplaces: Poll Finds Bipartisan Public Support for Creating State Insurance Exchanges Despite Continuing Party Divisions Over the ACA
Princeton, N.J.A majority of Americans put the creation of state-based health insurance exchanges at the top of the priority list for health policy in their state this year, according to a survey released today by the Kaiser Family Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Harvard School of Public Health.
Fifty-five percent of the public, including majorities of Republicans and Democrats, say that establishing the exchangesa key element of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and one whose implementation has divided states along partisan political linesis a top priority for their governor and legislature. So far 18 states and the District of Columbia have declared that they will create their own state-based exchanges, seven other states have opted to establish exchanges in partnership with the federal government and 25 otherssome driven by resistance to the ACAappear set to default to a federally-run exchange.
Governors are largely splitting along partisan lines on the exchanges, but the public is not. People like the idea, said Drew Altman, President and CEO of the Kaiser Family Foundation.
ONce again, FACTS triumph over neocon/teabagger panic propaganda and wishful thinking.
ONce again, FACTS triumph over neocon/teabagger panic propaganda and wishful thinking.
I'm not a neocon, or a 'teabagger', but none of these 'facts' are relevant my objections to PPACA.
Your objections are irrelevent given the benefits and the information given out by Greenbeard.
Indeed, it's a big year and a lot of folks will have their hands full getting the word out to people about the new options that will be available to them this fall.
Meanwhile, last week we found out that folks generally want their states to get going on these new marketplaces: Poll Finds Bipartisan Public Support for Creating State Insurance Exchanges Despite Continuing Party Divisions Over the ACA
ONce again, FACTS triumph over neocon/teabagger panic propaganda and wishful thinking.
OK I want to see the chart showing how much health care, housing and education could be paid for by reforming the prisons on a STATE level (instead of fighting over federal control).
And how the same solutions of converting prisons into sustainable campuses for medical treatment and correctional programs could also solve immigration issues at the same time.
Do you have that chart to show where the money could be coming from to pay for reform?
Why should people waste time trying to accomodate your "what if" scenarios because YOU don't want to deal with the FACTS based on the discussion at hand?
First acknowledge Greenbeard was correct....then get off your butt and do your own research. THEN we can have a discussion.
I'm not a neocon, or a 'teabagger', but none of these 'facts' are relevant my objections to PPACA.
Your objections are irrelevent given the benefits and the information given out by Greenbeard.
Whether my concerns are irrelevant is yet to be determined, but what's clear is that Greenbeard's ilk are loathe to talk about them. Some people simply don't want to hear about freedom when it gets in the way of state power.
For the people who do still care about freedom and liberal democracy, about rule of law and constitutionally protected rights, I'll continue to urge them to fight against our descent into a corporatist state, and to resist the lure of false promises in exchange for lost freedoms.
Why should people waste time trying to accomodate your "what if" scenarios because YOU don't want to deal with the FACTS based on the discussion at hand?
First acknowledge Greenbeard was correct....then get off your butt and do your own research. THEN we can have a discussion.
I don't care what you do with your time. If you don't want to 'waste' it on discussion, don't.
FWIW, I'm not disputing the facts posted, nor have I pored over them with any scrutiny, because they have nothing to do with the reasons I'm opposed to PPACA. So, you can continue hopping up and down shouting about FACTS, but it's not really very persuasive.
Why should people waste time trying to accomodate your "what if" scenarios because YOU don't want to deal with the FACTS based on the discussion at hand?
First acknowledge Greenbeard was correct....then get off your butt and do your own research. THEN we can have a discussion.
I don't care what you do with your time. If you don't want to 'waste' it on discussion, don't.
FWIW, I'm not disputing the facts posted, nor have I pored over them with any scrutiny, because they have nothing to do with the reasons I'm opposed to PPACA. So, you can continue hopping up and down shouting about FACTS, but it's not really very persuasive.
Typical neocon/teabagger/libertarian smokescreen:
They put forth an assertion that is logically and factually disproven
They then try to change the subject with a "what if" scenario that is just barely related to the subject at hand
Then they just repeat their assertion ad nauseum, ignoring information that either negates or renders moot their assertions and claims.
Willful ignorance, parroting and insipid stubborness just doesn't cut for a convincing argument from folk like dblack...as the last two elections have shown.
I don't care what you do with your time. If you don't want to 'waste' it on discussion, don't.
FWIW, I'm not disputing the facts posted, nor have I pored over them with any scrutiny, because they have nothing to do with the reasons I'm opposed to PPACA. So, you can continue hopping up and down shouting about FACTS, but it's not really very persuasive.
Typical neocon/teabagger/libertarian smokescreen:
They put forth an assertion that is logically and factually disproven
Yeah? Which assertion?
They then try to change the subject with a "what if" scenario that is just barely related to the subject at hand
Then they just repeat their assertion ad nauseum, ignoring information that either negates or renders moot their assertions and claims.
Willful ignorance, parroting and insipid stubborness just doesn't cut for a convincing argument from folk like dblack...as the last two elections have shown.
Uh .... OK?
Typical neocon/teabagger/libertarian smokescreen:
They put forth an assertion that is logically and factually disproven
Yeah? Which assertion?
They then try to change the subject with a "what if" scenario that is just barely related to the subject at hand
Then they just repeat their assertion ad nauseum, ignoring information that either negates or renders moot their assertions and claims.
Willful ignorance, parroting and insipid stubborness just doesn't cut for a convincing argument from folk like dblack...as the last two elections have shown.
Uh .... OK?
I would suggest this willfully ignorant hack re-read the previous exchanges and then honestly address the issue, statements and questions, but it's obvious that he is just another neocon/teabagger parrot who cannot debate beyond a talking point. Back into the IA bin with him.
Yeah? Which assertion?
Uh .... OK?
I would suggest this willfully ignorant hack re-read the previous exchanges and then honestly address the issue, statements and questions, but it's obvious that he is just another neocon/teabagger parrot who cannot debate beyond a talking point. Back into the IA bin with him.
If that's easier than answering the question (which of my assertions are false?), go for it. Probably for the best.
I know you, and many others here, are preoccupied with the left/right pissing match. But honestly, there are more interesting things to talk about.
