Game Over For Obama

[driveby]

ACA is forcing the mainstream Dems and Pubs to work together, forcing the extremists of the far right and far left with their radical agendas to rage and impotence.

/\ /\ /\

Reactionary........

 

[PixieStix]

Yes.

Obama will never be President again after 2016.

It's over.

And his legacy as the first black President of this United States is ruined .

 

[Freewill]

good catch

1 and 2 might raise premiums.
6 would be a taxpayer cost, but trillions less than the cost of ACA. assume that 10 million would be getting govt paid insurance and that it cost $2000 per year -- 200 million, a drop in the bucket to the federal budget.

I am not trying to tear down you ideas merely discuss them.

Where does a person buy health care insurance, which is decent, for 2000/year? Sign me up right now.

just a number for example purposes, make it any number you like. its still a drop in the bucket compared to the federal budget------oops, if we ever have one again.

By what I am hearing policies run about 10000/ year for individual, although I really think that is a family. At that rate that would be 2 billion/year. But the point is mute no matter what way we would go the cost is going to be pretty much the same, in my opinion. Unless somehow doctors/hospitals are talked into taking less money for their services, I don't see that happening. The whole argument is over money and the people who have to buy individual policies.

 

[JoeB131]

And you folks are doing what Congress is finally doing: trying to make it work.

Good for you.

ACA was/is a bad idea put forth in a terrible piece of legislation. The problems with healthcare could have been solved with much simpler legislation as I suggested earlier in the thread.

But face reality, jake. ACA is not about healthcare or insurance. Its about a govt takeover of 1/6 of the economy because those on the left believe that the government can run our lives better than we can.

The good thing about it is that it is failing miserably and the voters are seeing what liberalism really is.

As Krauthammer said last week, ACA and Obama will set liberalism back for the next 50 years-----and thats a good thing for America.

I find it annoying that someone like Charles Krauthammer, who is only alive today because of first rate health coverage (he was paralyzed as a college student with no money) thinks it's wonderful that poorpeople should be denied simpler treatments.

If his fate had been left up to private insurers today, they'd have let him die.

Seriously, fuck Dr. Strangelove.

 

[Redfish]

The reform and massage of ACA is moderate, mainstream attempts to make it work.

Extreme would be to kill it or make the program a national health care socialized system.

Answer is obvious.

the easy answer would be to repeal it and then pass a one page law that said the following:

1. insurance companies cannot deny coverage to anyone with a pre-existing condition
2. no insurance policy shall have a lifetime maximum payment
3. insurance companies may compete across state lines
4. no malpractice award may exceed $500,000
5. the loser in a malpractice suit pays all court and legal costs
6. the govt will buy a medical policy for every citizen whose AGI is less than $xxxx (pick a number)
7. drug patents shall be limited to 3 years

problem solved, cost to the taxpayer---------ZERO.

The taxpayer won't pay for #6? lolol

1. The insurance companies will skirt that easily by setting the cost of a policy for someone with a pre-existing condition at an astronomical level proportionate to the condition. Making a policy available will be meaningless because it will be unaffordable.

2. This will not allow people to keep that insurance they like, which you people are throwing fits over.

I corrected that on #6. there would be a cost but it would be tiny compared to what ACA is going to cost us.

on 1 and 2, the legislation could specify that the increase to the premium for pre-existing conditions could not be more than X% of the premium for a healthy person. Lifetime maximums are not a big deal except for a very few people, so I don't see that as a problem.

 

[Redfish]

And you folks are doing what Congress is finally doing: trying to make it work.

Good for you.

ACA was/is a bad idea put forth in a terrible piece of legislation. The problems with healthcare could have been solved with much simpler legislation as I suggested earlier in the thread.

But face reality, jake. ACA is not about healthcare or insurance. Its about a govt takeover of 1/6 of the economy because those on the left believe that the government can run our lives better than we can.

The good thing about it is that it is failing miserably and the voters are seeing what liberalism really is.

As Krauthammer said last week, ACA and Obama will set liberalism back for the next 50 years-----and thats a good thing for America.

I find it annoying that someone like Charles Krauthammer, who is only alive today because of first rate health coverage (he was paralyzed as a college student with no money) thinks it's wonderful that poorpeople should be denied simpler treatments.

If his fate had been left up to private insurers today, they'd have let him die.

Seriously, fuck Dr. Strangelove.

Do you know for a fact that he did not have insurance when his accident occured? If not, then medicaid must have paid his bills. ACA would not have changed anything for him.

But I guess you are really saying that our old system was very good and took care of people with no money and no insurance---------

As usual, your red herrings are smelling pretty bad and please tell us when Krauthammer, or anyone else, ever said that poor people should be denied treatment.

 

[driveby]

And you folks are doing what Congress is finally doing: trying to make it work.

Good for you.

ACA was/is a bad idea put forth in a terrible piece of legislation. The problems with healthcare could have been solved with much simpler legislation as I suggested earlier in the thread.

But face reality, jake. ACA is not about healthcare or insurance. Its about a govt takeover of 1/6 of the economy because those on the left believe that the government can run our lives better than we can.

The good thing about it is that it is failing miserably and the voters are seeing what liberalism really is.

As Krauthammer said last week, ACA and Obama will set liberalism back for the next 50 years-----and thats a good thing for America.

I find it annoying that someone like Charles Krauthammer, who is only alive today because of first rate health coverage (he was paralyzed as a college student with no money) thinks it's wonderful that poorpeople should be denied simpler treatments.

If his fate had been left up to private insurers today, they'd have let him die.

Seriously, fuck Dr. Strangelove.

Wait, he was poor and got first rate coverage when there was no Obamacare? ... omgnoway! ....

 

[Redfish]

ACA was/is a bad idea put forth in a terrible piece of legislation. The problems with healthcare could have been solved with much simpler legislation as I suggested earlier in the thread.

But face reality, jake. ACA is not about healthcare or insurance. Its about a govt takeover of 1/6 of the economy because those on the left believe that the government can run our lives better than we can.

The good thing about it is that it is failing miserably and the voters are seeing what liberalism really is.

As Krauthammer said last week, ACA and Obama will set liberalism back for the next 50 years-----and thats a good thing for America.

I find it annoying that someone like Charles Krauthammer, who is only alive today because of first rate health coverage (he was paralyzed as a college student with no money) thinks it's wonderful that poorpeople should be denied simpler treatments.

If his fate had been left up to private insurers today, they'd have let him die.

Seriously, fuck Dr. Strangelove.

Wait, he was poor and got first rate coverage when there was no Obamacare? ... omgnoway! ....

I love the way liberals shit in their cereal bowls trying to defend the indefensible.

 

[Spoonman]

So, Obama is doomed yet another time? Golly, we've never heard that before. Must be true this time, because things are totally different from all the other times he was doomed.

Loosing your insurance cuts to the quick, intimately.

Unlike a Solyndra or Fast and Furious

yep, his attempted attack on the 2nd amendment and his healthcare plan hid people directly. those are two issues the republicans can ride to victory if they are smart about it

 

[PixieStix]

And you folks are doing what Congress is finally doing: trying to make it work.

Good for you.

ACA was/is a bad idea put forth in a terrible piece of legislation. The problems with healthcare could have been solved with much simpler legislation as I suggested earlier in the thread.

But face reality, jake. ACA is not about healthcare or insurance. Its about a govt takeover of 1/6 of the economy because those on the left believe that the government can run our lives better than we can.

The good thing about it is that it is failing miserably and the voters are seeing what liberalism really is.

As Krauthammer said last week, ACA and Obama will set liberalism back for the next 50 years-----and thats a good thing for America.

I find it annoying that someone like Charles Krauthammer, who is only alive today because of first rate health coverage (he was paralyzed as a college student with no money) thinks it's wonderful that poorpeople should be denied simpler treatments.

If his fate had been left up to private insurers today, they'd have let him die.

Seriously, fuck Dr. Strangelove.

He had no money? You know this how? Are you saying he was on welfare?

 

[Katzndogz]

There is no possibility that insurance companies should be made to insure those with pre existing conditions. If it were home insurance people wouldn't get a policy until the house was on fire. If it was car insurance, it would be the first call after an accident.

Those with serious pre existing conditions can be handled separately out of a created fund for the purpose.

 

[Redfish]

There is no possibility that insurance companies should be made to insure those with pre existing conditions. If it were home insurance people wouldn't get a policy until the house was on fire. If it was car insurance, it would be the first call after an accident.

Those with serious pre existing conditions can be handled separately out of a created fund for the purpose.

many pre-existing conditions are not expensive to treat. the insurance companies might have to give a % or two of profit to make it happen, not really a big deal.

what we don't need is another govt program.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Do you know for a fact that he did not have insurance when his accident occured? If not, then medicaid must have paid his bills. ACA would not have changed anything for him.

But I guess you are really saying that our old system was very good and took care of people with no money and no insurance---------

As usual, your red herrings are smelling pretty bad and please tell us when Krauthammer, or anyone else, ever said that poor people should be denied treatment.

But let's put it this way. A guy with no insurance gets into an accident like Charlie Strangelove did.

You think he'd still be alive today?

Incidently, I can't find any reference how a Harvard Student was insured back in the day, although I suspect it was probably part of his tuition.

 

[Redfish]

[

Do you know for a fact that he did not have insurance when his accident occured? If not, then medicaid must have paid his bills. ACA would not have changed anything for him.

But I guess you are really saying that our old system was very good and took care of people with no money and no insurance---------

As usual, your red herrings are smelling pretty bad and please tell us when Krauthammer, or anyone else, ever said that poor people should be denied treatment.

But let's put it this way. A guy with no insurance gets into an accident like Charlie Strangelove did.

You think he'd still be alive today?

Incidently, I can't find any reference how a Harvard Student was insured back in the day, although I suspect it was probably part of his tuition.

of course he would be alive today, when did we stop treating people who have accidents?

did you mix your paxil with your valium this morning?

 

[Derideo_Te]

first tell me how the 30 or 40 tea party members of the house have the power to shut down the govt, default on the debt, put barricades around monuments, and "destroy the economy".

you certainly give the small group of people a lot of power and authority.

Your short term memory loss gives lie to your claim that you have an MBA. They did it by breaking their oath and not passing a bill to fully fund the legislation that was required to operate the government. They also threatened to destroy the economy by not raising the debt ceiling either.

your short term memory resembles that of a tree snail.

There was plenty of money coming in to the treasury every week to pay the interest on the debt (we never pay anything on the principal), fund the military and all but 15% of "non essential" govt functions. It was obama who directed the shutdown, barricaded monuments, and sent govt employees home.

Raising the debt ceiling is not needed to "fully fund the legislation that was required to run the government". New debt is for new spending, not old spending.

But on that topic, mr fiscal wizard, how much debt is too much? currently its 17 trillion. Is 25 trillion too much, 50 trillion? 100 trillion? When will you libs call a halt to spending more than we take in? or do you think it can just go on forever?

For someone who allegedly has an MBA you know absolutely nothing about how the government finances and legal obligations work. You also alleged that there were "liberal professors" at HBS. The business school is about economics and how to run a corporation. Every one of your posts makes it more and more clear that the closest you ever got to HBS was on the internet.

 

[Redfish]

Your short term memory loss gives lie to your claim that you have an MBA. They did it by breaking their oath and not passing a bill to fully fund the legislation that was required to operate the government. They also threatened to destroy the economy by not raising the debt ceiling either.

your short term memory resembles that of a tree snail.

There was plenty of money coming in to the treasury every week to pay the interest on the debt (we never pay anything on the principal), fund the military and all but 15% of "non essential" govt functions. It was obama who directed the shutdown, barricaded monuments, and sent govt employees home.

Raising the debt ceiling is not needed to "fully fund the legislation that was required to run the government". New debt is for new spending, not old spending.

But on that topic, mr fiscal wizard, how much debt is too much? currently its 17 trillion. Is 25 trillion too much, 50 trillion? 100 trillion? When will you libs call a halt to spending more than we take in? or do you think it can just go on forever?

For someone who allegedly has an MBA you know absolutely nothing about how the government finances and legal obligations work. You also alleged that there were "liberal professors" at HBS. The business school is about economics and how to run a corporation. Every one of your posts makes it more and more clear that the closest you ever got to HBS was on the internet.

I would post a copy of my diploma, but then you would know who I am.

HBS is about how to run a business, but its also true that most of the prof lean to the left and their "business" ideas tend to be liberal--and many times don't work.

But thats OK, we just accept them for who they are and learn what we can. Actually my company sent me there for my MBA after I had proven that I could make a lot of money for them, after HBS that continued until I had given them back the years that I promised. Then I went independent and made money for myself.

America is a wonderful country, anyone can succeed if he/she is willing to work hard and has a good mind.

what really bothers me is that those on the left seem to want to take that away and turn everything over to a small bunch of super elites in DC.

 

[LTCArmyRet]

the fuck? its three years out you moron.literally nothing has happened yet with the race and you have the balls to state this? Please never post on a politics forum again, because you are just embarrassing.

Three years, or thirty, doesn't matter. "If you like your policy, you can keep it, if you like your doctor, you get to keep them, period" will go down in history as the nail that was put into the coffin for many dumbocrats in the next two elections.

then you learned nothing when Romrom ran

WTF does Romney not getting elected have to do with this huge abomination called ACA?

 

[JakeStarkey]

There is no possibility that insurance companies should be made to insure those with pre existing conditions. If it were home insurance people wouldn't get a policy until the house was on fire. If it was car insurance, it would be the first call after an accident.

Those with serious pre existing conditions can be handled separately out of a created fund for the purpose.

False derivative analyses, so ignore that silliness.

See, I like your comment about pre existing conditions and how to handle them.

With you guys getting invested in making ACA better, the country will be better.

 

[LTCArmyRet]

your short term memory resembles that of a tree snail.

There was plenty of money coming in to the treasury every week to pay the interest on the debt (we never pay anything on the principal), fund the military and all but 15% of "non essential" govt functions. It was obama who directed the shutdown, barricaded monuments, and sent govt employees home.

Raising the debt ceiling is not needed to "fully fund the legislation that was required to run the government". New debt is for new spending, not old spending.

But on that topic, mr fiscal wizard, how much debt is too much? currently its 17 trillion. Is 25 trillion too much, 50 trillion? 100 trillion? When will you libs call a halt to spending more than we take in? or do you think it can just go on forever?

For someone who allegedly has an MBA you know absolutely nothing about how the government finances and legal obligations work. You also alleged that there were "liberal professors" at HBS. The business school is about economics and how to run a corporation. Every one of your posts makes it more and more clear that the closest you ever got to HBS was on the internet.

I would post a copy of my diploma, but then you would know who I am.

HBS is about how to run a business, but its also true that most of the prof lean to the left and their "business" ideas tend to be liberal--and many times don't work.

But thats OK, we just accept them for who they are and learn what we can. Actually my company sent me there for my MBA after I had proven that I could make a lot of money for them, after HBS that continued until I had given them back the years that I promised. Then I went independent and made money for myself.

America is a wonderful country, anyone can succeed if he/she is willing to work hard and has a good mind.

what really bothers me is that those on the left seem to want to take that away and turn everything over to a small bunch of super elites in DC.

hey redfish, when you gonna realize that no matter how big a hammer you get, your not gonna change the dumbocrat anvil. he's spouting off about obligations after record setting tax revenues the past two years and oduma still wants to increase spending along with all the dumbocrats and their socialist programs. you and I know they don't/won't work, and you need to learn this about dumbocrats, you can't fix stupid.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Three years, or thirty, doesn't matter. "If you like your policy, you can keep it, if you like your doctor, you get to keep them, period" will go down in history as the nail that was put into the coffin for many dumbocrats in the next two elections.

then you learned nothing when Romrom ran

WTF does Romney not getting elected have to do with this huge abomination called ACA?

Since you need it spelled out to you the Republicans made the 2012 election about the ACA and they lost. They have failed to repeal the ACA 40+ times. They have failed to get the ACA overturned by the Supreme Court. They have failed to shutdown the government in an attempt to defund the ACA.

The ACA is still around and the GOP is splitting apart. At some point you are going to have to stop and realize that your obsession with the ACA is doing your own party far more harm than good.