Exactly Why the Democrats Go Down in Flames in 2014

[Geaux4it]

Joey,


It sounds like you went through a personal tragedy. If I could give you a bro hug I would.

But hey, since insurance companies are so bad....why did Obama lift up his skirts and let them have their way with him? I mean...Obamacare gives the insurance companies all the power.

Joey...you say you hate insurance companies, and yet in Obamacare, your Kenyan Messiah gives the insurance companies everything they want. Joey, I am not real sure how you work out the logic of all of that in your brain...but my guess is there is such powerful delusional rationalizations going on there.

If the Insurance companies were so happy with ObamaCare, they wouldn't be squealing like little bitches now.

The Insurance companies didn't get what they want. They can't disallow for pre-existing conditions and they can't limit lifetime payouts. In short, they can't cheat their customers anymore. And eventually, they'll just become government sanction utlities before we have a lick of common sense and cut them out and go to MediCare for all, which is what we should have done.

Why should a business be expected to take loses?

-Geaux

 

[JoeB131]

Wow, you guys are delusional.

Most employer programs ALREADY meet the mandate. This is kind of what you don't get, is that unilke individual plans, the pools for employers are large enough to spread the risk around.

Now, yeah, here's the number you keep taking out of context that every year, the old plans are cancelled and they have to come up with new plans that are usually 90% the same as the old one.

I think what you guys are a bit confused about is that there is a plan called "ObamaCare" that is actually paying out money. There really isn't. It's just an expansion and mandates on existing plans.

Most employer policies already meet the requirements? Ok prove it. Second, it doesn't matter. Because once the employer mandate becomes effective, employers will begin dumping their employees insurance altogether because the fine is cheaper than insuring their employees. That is how this thing was set up. The deliberate scuttling of employer provided health insurance was the target of PPACA.
To address your last point, let's say for a moment you are correct. There is no such thing as obamacare.
I have two questions..
1. What is the $900 billion( estimated before passage then recalculated to cost three times that) for?
2.If Obamacare really is just mandates, then why is there a need for a 950 page law, 16,000 new IRS employees and a host of other new regulations and rules?

Dumbass- if that where the case, why didn't they dump their employees YEARS ago?

I mean, there's no fine now, and dumping them into nothing would be cheaper than paying the fine or insuring them. So why do they offer health care?

Well, unfortunately, because it is expected for any job that doesn't require you to ask if they want fries with that. You want to attract employees with any kind of skill, you are pretty much expected to offer health insurance. And because unlike individual market plans, they are group plans, they are more comprehensive because it is unlikely more than one person might develop a catastrophic illness.

Now, you do have a few unethical companies that found it easier to fire employees when they get sick, injured or pregnant, like the last bunch of jokers who cured my Republicanism. But really, in most of the world, companies are going to offer good insurance.

Some little fly by night company won't, but they wont be in business long, anyway.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Why should a business be expected to take loses?

-Geaux

Here's the thing, Cleetus.

They are promising a service. If they can't provide the service, they shouldn't be in business.

Period.

And when the CEO of Cigna gets an 83 Million Dollar retirement bonus, but Cigna denies a 17 year old girl a liver transplant because it costs too much, then there's some serious problems with priorities.

 

[Geaux4it]

[

Why should a business be expected to take loses?

-Geaux

Here's the thing, Cleetus.

They are promising a service. If they can't provide the service, they shouldn't be in business.

Period.

And when the CEO of Cigna gets an 83 Million Dollar retirement bonus, but Cigna denies a 17 year old girl a liver transplant because it costs too much, then there's some serious problems with priorities.

That was the risk the parents took and was deemed acceptable. Secondly, I like how the libs want to decide how a CEO should be compensated. All this, without knowing what risk he/she took to be rewarded with such compensation.

And the libs cry that Obama is not responsible for current lack of jobs

-Geaux

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

[

I'm just not sure why people buying their own insurance as opposed to buying it from the government horrifies you so much.

Oh, yeah, because you "like to help the poor" or something. Gee, how does buying a plan more expensive than the one you just got kicked off of because Democrats "like helping the poor" helping the poor, exactly?

Give me an effing break.

Probably because having been FUCKED IN THE ASS by a big insurance company because I had some silly idea that when I paid into an insurance plan and worked for insurance coverage, I wouldn't lose my job after I made a claim.

Here's the thing. The Insurance industry are a real bunch of lying, cheating scumbags, every last one of them. But you clowns on the right INSISTED that instead of going to a cheaper, more efficient and more equitable SINGLE PAYER plan like every other country has gone to, we just HAD to preserve private insurance's slice of the pie.

"Oh, my God, we can't cheat our customers anymore?"

What makes you think that looking to government, that the overall costs surrounding health care will be cheaper and less of a tax burden on our national debt? The fact is patients under NHS are being denied treatment through a government run system that can't control it's costs. Where is this improvement in providing improved quality care? Here are some news articles from Great Britain revealing the current problems patients are finding under their national health care system.

More than 80,000 people a year suffer blood clots and the annual cost to the NHS is £640million.

Campaigners insist NOAC drugs save the health service cash by keeping people out of hospital.

A survey by charity Lifeblood found 64% of GPs had been prevented from giving patients NOAC *medicines by their own practice managers.

Of those, 98% said it was because of the NHS budget cuts brought in by Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt.

One patient, Joga Khera, told how his consultant had *recommended he be given NOAC after developing a blood clot in his leg last year. But his GP would not prescribe them.

The 45-year-old purchasing manager, of Iver, Bucks, said: “They just refused.

NHS cuts: Blood clot patients being denied vital drugs putting lives at risk - Mirror Online

Cancer charities are calling for the Government to pledge it will not go back to days when patients ‘had to beg’ for life-prolonging drugs

Access to cancer medicines will revert to being the worst in Europe, with more than 16,000 patients a year denied help, they say.

16,000 cancer patients a year to be denied vital medicine as Government's specialist drugs fund is wound up | Mail Online

Kidney cancer patients denied life-extending drug as NHS watchdog declares it 'not cost effective' | Mail Online

 

[Truthseeker420]

Okay Kids,

Here is exactly what happens to the Democrats in 2014. There are two options. Each one is a disaster. Both involve Obamacare.


Option 1. Obama enforces the employer mandate. If this happens it could save Obamacare. Without the employer mandate the risk pool sucks, there is no evolution to single payer, and Obamacare is economically unsustainable.

The bad news. Roughly 100 million Americans lose their employer based insurance. Both HHS and the Justice Dept are already estimating half to 2/3 of employer based insurance goes away immediately. If this happens the mid term election is an historic bloodbath for Democrats (if it is not already).

Option 2. King Obama decides he will not enforce the employer mandate for yet another year. Roughly 100 million Americans get to keep their employer based insurance. Dems will obviously do better in the mid term elections.

The bad news. Another year long delay in the employer mandate means Obamacare likely collapses under it own weight due to a very poor risk pool that will not be filled with working folks and their families with money, but instead filled with the old, sick, poor and unemployed (i.e. no people who can go into the exchanges and actually buy something).

So Dems, those are your choices. Enforce the employer mandate and potentially save Obamacare, but lose massively in the mid term election (and many elections thereafter).

Or, delay the employer mandate yet again, and probably kill Obamacare. What do you do?

Obama was elected in a landslide, America has spoken on Obamacare.

 

[Geaux4it]

Okay Kids,

Here is exactly what happens to the Democrats in 2014. There are two options. Each one is a disaster. Both involve Obamacare.


Option 1. Obama enforces the employer mandate. If this happens it could save Obamacare. Without the employer mandate the risk pool sucks, there is no evolution to single payer, and Obamacare is economically unsustainable.

The bad news. Roughly 100 million Americans lose their employer based insurance. Both HHS and the Justice Dept are already estimating half to 2/3 of employer based insurance goes away immediately. If this happens the mid term election is an historic bloodbath for Democrats (if it is not already).

Option 2. King Obama decides he will not enforce the employer mandate for yet another year. Roughly 100 million Americans get to keep their employer based insurance. Dems will obviously do better in the mid term elections.

The bad news. Another year long delay in the employer mandate means Obamacare likely collapses under it own weight due to a very poor risk pool that will not be filled with working folks and their families with money, but instead filled with the old, sick, poor and unemployed (i.e. no people who can go into the exchanges and actually buy something).

So Dems, those are your choices. Enforce the employer mandate and potentially save Obamacare, but lose massively in the mid term election (and many elections thereafter).

Or, delay the employer mandate yet again, and probably kill Obamacare. What do you do?

America has spoken on Obamacare.

And like Obama, they lied.

Poll: Americans? approval of health care law drops ? CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs


2 weeks ago
Poll: Americans' approval of health care law drops

Posted by
CNN's Ashley Killough
(CNN) – Public opinion of the federal health care law is growing more negative as a new poll indicates the gap between those who favor and don't favor Obamacare has become the widest it's been in the last year.

According to the Gallup poll released Thursday, 40% of Americans approve of the Affordable Care Act, while 55% disapprove.

The change in opinion comes as the Obama administration plays defense over the botched HealthCare.gov rollout and questions over people losing their health insurance, despite being assured they wouldn't.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Why should a business be expected to take loses?

-Geaux

Here's the thing, Cleetus.

They are promising a service. If they can't provide the service, they shouldn't be in business.

Period.

And when the CEO of Cigna gets an 83 Million Dollar retirement bonus, but Cigna denies a 17 year old girl a liver transplant because it costs too much, then there's some serious problems with priorities.

That was the risk the parents took and was deemed acceptable. Secondly, I like how the libs want to decide how a CEO should be compensated. All this, without knowing what risk he/she took to be rewarded with such compensation.

And the libs cry that Obama is not responsible for current lack of jobs

-Geaux

I'm sorry, guy, unless we are harvesting the CEO for transplant organs if he fails, none of them really is taking a great enough risk to get 8 figures in compensation.

But hell's bell's spanky. These guys get the 8 figure salaries when they totally fuck up.

The CEO of GM, before he handed his company over to the government to get saved, was getting paid 12 million.

But, no, he wasn't the problem. He was only making the awful decisions. It's that auto-worker who got paid a whopping $28.00 an hour that was the problem.

That was the risk the parents took and was deemed acceptable.

No, the parents did NOT accept that risk. The person in question got his insurance from his employer, which in this case, happened to be Lexus (maker of cars driven by douchebags.)

When Cigna refused to pay for the liver transplant, he sued, and the courts ruled that since the contract for health insurance was between Cigna and Lexus, he didn't have standing. Because we have "At Will" employment, he had no contract with Lexus that could be enforced.

 

[TemplarKormac]

[

Why should a business be expected to take loses?

-Geaux

Here's the thing, Cleetus.

They are promising a service. If they can't provide the service, they shouldn't be in business.

Period.

And when the CEO of Cigna gets an 83 Million Dollar retirement bonus, but Cigna denies a 17 year old girl a liver transplant because it costs too much, then there's some serious problems with priorities.

This is where your argument dies. This government promised a service, and has so far not been able to provide it. Therefore the logical conclusion here is... wait for it... for them not to be in business within the healthcare insurance industry. The government lied to the people about this service, and if they were any other insurance company, they would be shut down and fined, not to mention the people running the outfit would be sent to jail for fraud.

 

[Votto]

[

I'm just not sure why people buying their own insurance as opposed to buying it from the government horrifies you so much.

Oh, yeah, because you "like to help the poor" or something. Gee, how does buying a plan more expensive than the one you just got kicked off of because Democrats "like helping the poor" helping the poor, exactly?

Give me an effing break.

Probably because having been FUCKED IN THE ASS by a big insurance company because I had some silly idea that when I paid into an insurance plan and worked for insurance coverage, I wouldn't lose my job after I made a claim.

Here's the thing. The Insurance industry are a real bunch of lying, cheating scumbags, every last one of them. But you clowns on the right INSISTED that instead of going to a cheaper, more efficient and more equitable SINGLE PAYER plan like every other country has gone to, we just HAD to preserve private insurance's slice of the pie.

"Oh, my God, we can't cheat our customers anymore?"

I think Joe answered the question. The goal is to go single payer, and not to make Obamacare work.

There, that was easy.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Why should a business be expected to take loses?

-Geaux

Here's the thing, Cleetus.

They are promising a service. If they can't provide the service, they shouldn't be in business.

Period.

And when the CEO of Cigna gets an 83 Million Dollar retirement bonus, but Cigna denies a 17 year old girl a liver transplant because it costs too much, then there's some serious problems with priorities.

This is where your argument dies. This government promised a service, and has so far not been able to provide it. Therefore the logical conclusion here is... wait for it... for them not to be in business within the healthcare insurance industry. The government lied to the people about this service, and if they were any other insurance company, they would be shut down and fined, not to mention the people running the outfit would be sent to jail for fraud.

The government is providing the service it promised.

The failure is on the part of the private insurers, who insisted they could comply and haven't.

Please don't try to make more out of the website than you are, because you are just going to look silly in a couple of months.

 

[JoeB131]

[

I'm just not sure why people buying their own insurance as opposed to buying it from the government horrifies you so much.

Oh, yeah, because you "like to help the poor" or something. Gee, how does buying a plan more expensive than the one you just got kicked off of because Democrats "like helping the poor" helping the poor, exactly?

Give me an effing break.

Probably because having been FUCKED IN THE ASS by a big insurance company because I had some silly idea that when I paid into an insurance plan and worked for insurance coverage, I wouldn't lose my job after I made a claim.

Here's the thing. The Insurance industry are a real bunch of lying, cheating scumbags, every last one of them. But you clowns on the right INSISTED that instead of going to a cheaper, more efficient and more equitable SINGLE PAYER plan like every other country has gone to, we just HAD to preserve private insurance's slice of the pie.

"Oh, my God, we can't cheat our customers anymore?"

I think Joe answered the question. The goal is to go single payer, and not to make Obamacare work.

There, that was easy.

the insurance companies could make ObamaCare work if they wanted to.

They are just hoping it will fail if they drag their heels enough.

And frankly, what would be wrong with single payer? It works fine for everyone else.

 

[hangover]

Exactly Why the Democrats Go Down in Flames in 2014

Cons said that in 2008 and 2012. Crow must tasted pretty good to the cons.

If the cons can convince this country to destroy Social Security and throw the elderly out in the street, the U.S. has become as ugly as nazi Germany.

If the cons con get the voters destroy healthcare, and throw the sick out in the street, the voters are lemmings.

If the cons can get the U.S. to throw the poor out in the street for the sake of more money for the war machine, Armageddon can't be far off.

If the cons can really talk 95% into giving everything to the rich, they deserve the banana republic the cons envision.

The cons take everybody in this country for a bunch of stupid chumps. Do you really like the idea of being a peasant? Do you really believe fascism will bring utopia? Do American women really want to be like Muslim women? Do you really think destroying education will make America more competitive?

 

[WelfareQueen]

Here's the thing, Cleetus.

They are promising a service. If they can't provide the service, they shouldn't be in business.

Period.

And when the CEO of Cigna gets an 83 Million Dollar retirement bonus, but Cigna denies a 17 year old girl a liver transplant because it costs too much, then there's some serious problems with priorities.

This is where your argument dies. This government promised a service, and has so far not been able to provide it. Therefore the logical conclusion here is... wait for it... for them not to be in business within the healthcare insurance industry. The government lied to the people about this service, and if they were any other insurance company, they would be shut down and fined, not to mention the people running the outfit would be sent to jail for fraud.

The government is providing the service it promised.

The failure is on the part of the private insurers, who insisted they could comply and haven't.

Please don't try to make more out of the website than you are, because you are just going to look silly in a couple of months.

No Joe,

The website will not be working in a couple of months. It is now 5 days and counting. Remember? Obama said it would be working smoothly by November 30th.

If it is not working smoothly....I pretty sure Obama will have lied again. Don't ya think?

 

[JakeStarkey]

And when the CEO of Cigna gets an 83 Million Dollar retirement bonus, but Cigna denies a 17 year old girl a liver transplant because it costs too much, then there's some serious problems with priorities.

That was the risk the parents took and was deemed acceptable.

The day a CEO retirement is more important than a child's life is the day the system changes to benefit the average citizen.

Guess what, gang.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Here's the thing, Cleetus.

They are promising a service. If they can't provide the service, they shouldn't be in business.

Period.

And when the CEO of Cigna gets an 83 Million Dollar retirement bonus, but Cigna denies a 17 year old girl a liver transplant because it costs too much, then there's some serious problems with priorities.

That was the risk the parents took and was deemed acceptable. Secondly, I like how the libs want to decide how a CEO should be compensated. All this, without knowing what risk he/she took to be rewarded with such compensation.

And the libs cry that Obama is not responsible for current lack of jobs

-Geaux

I'm sorry, guy, unless we are harvesting the CEO for transplant organs if he fails, none of them really is taking a great enough risk to get 8 figures in compensation.

But hell's bell's spanky. These guys get the 8 figure salaries when they totally fuck up.

The CEO of GM, before he handed his company over to the government to get saved, was getting paid 12 million.

But, no, he wasn't the problem. He was only making the awful decisions. It's that auto-worker who got paid a whopping $28.00 an hour that was the problem.

That was the risk the parents took and was deemed acceptable.

No, the parents did NOT accept that risk. The person in question got his insurance from his employer, which in this case, happened to be Lexus (maker of cars driven by douchebags.)

When Cigna refused to pay for the liver transplant, he sued, and the courts ruled that since the contract for health insurance was between Cigna and Lexus, he didn't have standing. Because we have "At Will" employment, he had no contract with Lexus that could be enforced.

That's up to the BOD.. not you or some government bozo. You statists amaze me...

 

[WillowTree]

Wow, you guys are delusional.

Most employer programs ALREADY meet the mandate. This is kind of what you don't get, is that unilke individual plans, the pools for employers are large enough to spread the risk around.

Now, yeah, here's the number you keep taking out of context that every year, the old plans are cancelled and they have to come up with new plans that are usually 90% the same as the old one.

I think what you guys are a bit confused about is that there is a plan called "ObamaCare" that is actually paying out money. There really isn't. It's just an expansion and mandates on existing plans.

Here's the real truth,,, obama is counting on young people to prop up his obama care, it's a mandate don't ya know. I checked out the S. Carolina exchanges because that's where my young people live. The best they can do is to purchase insurance for 179.00 per month with a ten thousand dollar deductible. So basically the young people are self insured. I don't know of many young folks who can pull ten thousand dollars out of their butts do you? I told him to just ignore the law, obummer ignores the law left and right, don't see why the young people can't.

 

[WillowTree]

When the employer mandate kicks in,, yep, the employers will drop their employees off the roles in order to save money most employers cannot afford the increases either, and we already know that we are now a nation of part time workers. deal with it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

All insurance programs want young folks in to spread the pool risk.

Why would the government's program be any different.

 

[Redfish]

Wow, you guys are delusional.

Most employer programs ALREADY meet the mandate. This is kind of what you don't get, is that unilke individual plans, the pools for employers are large enough to spread the risk around.

Now, yeah, here's the number you keep taking out of context that every year, the old plans are cancelled and they have to come up with new plans that are usually 90% the same as the old one.

I think what you guys are a bit confused about is that there is a plan called "ObamaCare" that is actually paying out money. There really isn't. It's just an expansion and mandates on existing plans.

Here's the real truth,,, obama is counting on young people to prop up his obama care, it's a mandate don't ya know. I checked out the S. Carolina exchanges because that's where my young people live. The best they can do is to purchase insurance for 179.00 per month with a ten thousand dollar deductible. So basically the young people are self insured. I don't know of many young folks who can pull ten thousand dollars out of their butts do you? I told him to just ignore the law, obummer ignores the law left and right, don't see why the young people can't.

many of the same young people that must sign up in order to fund obamacare are also the ones who are allowed to stay on their parents policy until they are 27.

Its called a conundrum, I think